The Tax-Cut Game

Those impolite and most politic campaign advertisements have been launched for an election campaign that everyone claims not to want, but which they see nevertheless in the not too distant future. Setting aside the small-minded and ineffective taunts one party levels against the other and the personal attacks on the credibility and trustworthiness - and lack of - the leaders, it can be usefully assumed that no one is seeking to occupy the 'high ground'.

On the other hand, there is a great disservice done to the country and the voters when the opposition parties claim truths that are less than self-evident, because they represent half-truths or downright evasions of reality. Take, for example, the government's beyond-debate federal corporate tax cuts, already set in motion because they received general agreement as a positive economic step to enhance financial recovery.

The federal corporate tax rates have been cut back to 16.5%, and another cut is planned for next year, to 15%, making Canada very competitive for investment among the G8. Although the Liberals had initially agreed with the economic utility of the cut-backs, now they're in campaign mode and their leader is fulminating that this is the wrong time for tax cuts when the country is in deficit mode with a stunningly high debt.

Mr. Ignatieff speaks passionately to the issue: "I listen to Mark Carney and the studies from the Bank of Canada that make it very clear that cutting corporate tax doesn't necessarily create jobs, it doesn't necessarily increase productivity". But the governor of the Bank of Canada has clearly stated he is not in opposition to corporate tax cuts.

"Corporate tax competitiveness, particularly for new investment, has improved markedly over the past decade and is now among the most attractive in the industrialized world. Canada has actively pursued trade openness through new agreements and unilateral tariff reductions. Staying the course in these regards is likely the single most important contribution of the public sector", claimed Mr. Carney.

And, this just in: Japan and Australia plan to reduce their corporate tax rates, and so is Britain, for starters. Ireland, in the economic doldrums from its former glory, is resisting an austerity plan that urges it to raise its low corporate income tax rate; it knows that to stoke growth it must invite investment. Most Canadian provinces are moving to reduce their own business tax rates to 10%; in tandem with the federal government.

While Prime Minister Stephen Harper has proudly celebrated five years of fairly successful minority government, Mr. Ignatieff sneers that the Conservative government has failed Canadians. Hardly surprising since the initial warnings that emanated from the NDP and the Liberals warned Canadian voters of dire consequences to follow resulting from the Conservatives' "hidden agenda".

That hidden agenda has revealed itself as a moderate, steady-as-she-goes administration that has resulted in some economic advantages, despite the global financial crisis. Despite the belt-tightening that Canadians have had to accede to, and while we're still on the cusp of some vulnerabilities, our per capita GDP has increased, as well as hourly wages and personal disposable income.

Retired couples pay less income tax, allowed to combine-and-split, and we're paying less GST. Canada has agreed with many of the moves taken by this government on the international scene; a leadership role within the G8 and G20, a defence of our allies in the United Nations, and a defining move to support the health of women and children in developing countries.

Within the country Mr. Harper has travelled widely and made himself better acquainted with the nation, acquainting Canadians with his personal endowments, and more people think he presents as finer mettle for the post of prime minister than his opposition.

And it couldn't come at a better time, for it is expected that at the World Economic Forum coming up in Davos, Switzerland, it will be revealed that we've nowhere to go but up, and fast. There is informed talk that the world may be entering a long-term growth cycle that will impact favourably on all economies throughout the world simultaneously.

Now that's ample reason for waiting with bated breath. We're waiting.

How We (Canadians) Agonize

The G8 and the G20 delegations have come, they have departed. Canada feted world leaders.

World leaders meeting to reach out to one another in a hail-fellow-well-met atmosphere of getting to know one another on a personal level. They are the political movers-and-shakers of the world. Their personalities are as diverse as the countries they represent. Among them sober, honest, well-meaning and even capable minds. Along with the authoritarians representing as democrats, the slightly insane as well-balanced, the autocratic egotists as concerned with the well-being of the state of the world.

Most of these world leaders are a combination of all those human characteristics. All of them own more than their share of hubris. Most of them are reasonably sincere in their wish to represent the best interests of their countries. They discuss, between them, matters of great world moment. Global finance, security, jurisprudence, social unrest, poverty.

They want to be viewed with respect and they want to view themselves with respect, and this they achieve by the motions required of world leaders to take the stage and lead.

Toronto survived the onslaught of tens of thousands of political hangers-on, news media, NGOs, protesters, and lived to tell the tale. To some it's not a very enlightening tale, to others its satisfactory, but more might have been accomplished. In fact, nothing much was accomplished; the proof of what may be accomplished is yet in the future. But agreement was reached to be agreeable, generally, to the positions put forward.

So, while the politicians and the heads of state discussed issues and made recommendations, thousands of social activists; said to total between ten to twenty thousand, greeted the trained and prepared integrated police and security forces whose purpose it was to ensure that the demonstrations be orderly and not come within spitting distance of the key G20-assembly buildings in downtown Toronto.

It remains a puzzle why police did not immediately step in and arrest both the thuggish events and the thugs involved in torching police vehicles and smashing shop windows, but their attention was, presumably, invested elsewhere. A majority of Toronto residents appear satisfied that the police did their job and did it well, while impressions outside Toronto are that better police work could have been done.

What Canadians take for violence, represents muted dissent elsewhere in the world. What the world takes for violence represents nothing resembling what took place in polite Toronto. Violence is cracked and bleeding heads, and plenty of them, along with the occasional, unfortunate death. With whole neighbourhoods trashed, and lots of looting, and threats and not rubber truncheons but live fire.

Of course comparisons of this kind are rather invalid. Can we really compare civil life, police agencies and freedoms guaranteed under the Canadian Constitution with what occurs in other parts of the world, particularly what is termed the free world? There is, of course, Greece, where demonstrations can get fairly wild, and there is France, where hundreds of vehicles can be torched. And there is Iran where your life can be forfeit.

And then there is Canada, and the country living up to (or failing) the expectations of its people. And so we have the agony of introspection, and how things might have been done better than many people perceive them to have been done. The police have congratulated themselves on their cool. The mayor of Toronto proudly congratulated the Toronto police for their restraint. And suggested another venue next time around.

Both individuals involved in peaceful demonstrations, and those merely gawking, along with some reporters, have claimed to have been involved in incidents where police were rude, uncivil and even physically brutal. It isn't easy being a police officer anywhere, at any time, and certainly not in such a tense, adversarial atmosphere.

It'll all come out in the wash.

G8 and 20 can only map the route to chaos.

None of the West's leaders are either capable or competent.

The destination, after years of inaction and dither, for all our economies is chaos!

All that can now be altered is the route we take and the speed at which we arrive.

Why is this the case? I believe it is because in both the EU and the USA we have had the democratic political process corrupted. Get big money out of politics in the USA and disband the EU across Europe and a new start can thereafter be made.

Canada, Ably Led

Prime Minister Stephen Harper had an agenda with respect to Canada's place in the international community, that he planned "to bring Canada back as a credible player on the world stage. Canadians have always wanted a government that plays a role in the world. I intend to make this a country that leads." He has, in fact, in the four years of his resilient minority government, taken strong steps to lead Canada away from previous governments' fence-sitting attitudes.

And for his troubles, the Liberals and the NDP loudly lament that Canada has lost its moral compass on the world stage, positioning itself as a staunch friend and ally of countries it deems reflects Canada's values, not the least of which are the values represented by democratic liberalism. Canada has become a stalwart in a dwindling international-community-support position vis-a-vis Israel, under this Conservative-led government.

No longer sitting on the sidelines in the United Nations when Israel is singularly isolated and denounced in terms well suited to describe her Middle East neighbours, who have excelled in turning reality into fantasy and delusion into reality.

In point of fact, Canada's international reputation has bloomed under the leadership of this prime minister. Whose own personal rectitude and views leadership abilities, and values of just and fair determinations based on reality have brought him respect on the international scene and at least as much at home.

No longer does Canada equivocate, trying to see which way the wind is blowing, to best benefit its reputation among countries whose practises it should be condemning, not agreeing with.

Sitting at the G8 table, Canada is distinguishing itself, as a leader in financial management, earning the curiosity and respect of its global partners. Canada has much to say in matters as diverse as energy supply, climate change and world trade. The sacrifices of the country's military personnel charged with containing and pacifying a terrorist insurgency in Afghanistan as part of its NATO alliance obligations has earned the country further respect.

Yet old war horses like Paul Heinbecker, former ambassadorial-level functionary with Foreign Affairs, claims from his Liberal perspective that "Our reputation internationally is beginning to suffer". Not likely. This country has a prime minister in Mr. Harper whose grasp of international issues and their complexities comes second to none. Speaking with authority and clarity as he does, well-briefed and prepared to act.

Another former deputy foreign minister who served under both Paul Martin and Stephen Harper characterizes Mr. Harper as taking pains to ensure he knows the important details before committing himself, and stating his opinions and his understanding of situations in an articulate and reliable manner. Basically, the complaints rest with Stephen Harper's ideological bias, colouring his perceptions of the issues at hand.

Strange, that. Don't all prime ministers, representing their various political parties, own to an ideological bias? Is that ideology - the slant, the perspective and views they take when regarding issues, reflecting the values they subscribe to, as part of their political ideology or political position - not what drives individuals who aspire to the highest political office?

An obscure political science professor from the University of Prince Edward Island is cited as insightful in claiming that Prime Minister Harper's pro-Israel position will create difficulties in Canada's attempt to win a seat on the UN Security Council this year. Is the solution to sacrifice principles to obtain that seat? Is that not specifically what too many UN member-countries descend to, to obtain acceptance by abandoning moral principles?

The claim has also been put forward that Mr. Harper plays to domestic votes in structuring his foreign policies, with the emphasis on obtaining the Jewish vote. How does that make sense, when Jews make up a relatively small proportion of the population, and by contrast the Arab/Muslim vote is multiple-times greater? Claiming this to be foreign policy driven by public opinion polls is hardly credible.

"Harper has really politicized our foreign policy", claims Peter McKenna, foreign policy specialist at U. of PEI. Oh. Dear. Aren't all policies driven by politics? How very Canadian that all these self-proclaimed experts on Canada and Canadian politics and the merits and verities of Canadian prime ministerial material and ideologies are all rushing in to make their views known, when Canada is on the cusp of hosting the G8 and G20 meetings.

Prime Minister Harper is busy administering the internal affairs of Canada, and doing so ably. The country is much the better for it in every conceivable way. And, as it happens, he is also doing precisely what he promised before he took temporary ownership of the prime minister's office in the House of Commons: he is making friends and influencing other governments and parliamentarians, and he is putting Canada back on the world stage. Proudly.

Canada, ably led.

Firebombing Anarchists

Gentle souls, all. They simply have a major disagreement with the ineptitude and intransigent interference of government in their lives and the lives of the general citizenry. Perceiving how it could all be done infinitely better without governing entities prescribing and proscribing and interfering and complicating and controlling society.

Everyone, let's face it, likes to get off on criticizing government. In various degrees for any number of reasons, some fairly irrelevant and some critically important. Most of us make do with grumbling disaffection, telling ourselves we'll get our revenge at the polling booth. And then there's a minuscule proportion of any society that plan a more immediate, attention-getting device to ensure their message of discontent is heard sharp and clear.

The almost-comedic antics of the video-taping crew who took it upon themselves to firebomb a downtown Ottawa branch of the Royal Bank and in the process discommode RBC employees, with the message the bank was targeted because it had sponsored the Vancouver Olympics, staged on "Indian land" corruptly taken by a far earlier government agency, could be assumed to have been the clumsy work of a gang of young men.

Inspired by their sense of self-righteous denials of those world-controlling entities like the G8 and the World Bank, with their agendas to enrich the already-wealthy of the world, while tormenting and alienating and exploiting the already-disadvantaged of the world. They fight for justice and humanity and any methods they choose to utilize in the process are legitimate and fair, against a far more powerful antagonist.

And then, like a crossword puzzle that seems puzzling at first, but then just absurd, it is discovered that the combined investigation of police forces of the RCMP, OPP and Ottawa Police Force, have pieced together, thanks to citizen vigilance and a surplus of videos and their own astute background checks, a tale of stupidity gone absurdly awry. The thread begins with an outlier physics professor.

The University of Ottawa a year or so ago had an academic and performance disagreement with physics prof. Denis Rancourt whose course on physics-and-activism made for some fairly wacko-descriptive news items before he was finally dismissed by the university. Now, one of his students, 50-year-old C.F. Haridge, was found to be in possession of a stash of ammunition, after he was linked with the firebombing incident.

Claude Frederic Haridge, former student of Prof.Rancourt has, in fact, a number of criminal charges on his record. He loves electronics, and posted online this very thoughtful line: "Hopefully I'll be able to give back some of the stuff I've learned and help others develop some great ideas." The bank firebombing was obviously one of those great ideas. He has also, just incidentally, demonstrated against 'Israeli attacks on Palestinians'; clearly his passions are many.

One of his colleagues of the trio is a retired public servant, whose last position was at CIDA, the Canadian International Development Agency. Quite obviously, this man too, Roger Clement, 58 years of age, is still heavily engaged in his ideas of doing good in the world. The deserving world of the global disadvantaged. No longer employed by Canada's international aid agency, he has turned his fancy to strewing chaos at home, through active anarchy.

And he it was who rented the SUV used as the getaway vehicle after the bank firebombing. The third of the troika is, by comparison, a raw youth at 30, Matthew Morgan Brown, a known activist previously arrested as a result of his zestful demonstrations during the 2007 Montebello Summit and at the time of former U.S. President George W. Bush's 2004 visit to Ottawa.

This motley crew did create some buzz, and they did get their collective anarchist-ego stroked by national news coverage. When news of their bank firebombing hit the international press they must have been utterly ecstatic. Nothing, truly, succeeds like success. And if your goal is to attract attention they did succeed magnificently.

And having succeeded to the extent to which notoriety permitted them, they can be seen as the architects of the government's need to ensure no further 'protests', or anarchic chaos, or violence from whatever source, mars the smooth performance of the upcoming Toronto and Huntsville G8 and G20 summits.

A costly enterprise, in total.

Western Terrorism Central

The country is all abuzz with the new militancy of thugs bored out of their skulls by the tedium brought on through living in a secure society with all its social and cultural and variable pluralistic attributes, and opportunities for general advancement open to all. These thugs have chosen to call themselves social activists to give themselves an aura of acceptability among certain elements in our general society who proudly claim themselves "anarchists", prepared to upset the social order in the name of justice and social accountability.

All this activity centered around, for the moment, the upcoming G8 and G20 summits preparing to take place in Huntsville and Toronto, respectively. Just wait for the action to really get going. Meanwhile, Ottawa was thrilled to have been chosen as the site of the initial 'protest', with the Royal Bank of Canada branch in the Glebe fire-bombed and a gleefully-produced video aired in honour of thumbing dumb noses at law, order and social values.

In Toronto, meanwhile, the Toronto Community Mobilization Network hosted a press conference where their constituencies representing activist aboriginals, socialists, the disabled, feminists, unions, environmentalists, gays, Arabs and illegal aliens gave notice of their right to "mobilize" against the collective malign powers of global finance as represented by Western nations. Any group with an ax to grind welcome to come along and make havoc.

On the website of this network of society's disaffected clamouring to be heard, is a logo. That logo cleverly depicts a nominal cartoon of the needle-end of the CN Tower held aloft by a mob, piercing the G20. Now that is rather familiar. And quite obviously has its inspiration in the cartoon of an airplane hitting the top of the World Trade Tower, the symbolism clear enough in its sinister intent: hitting the imperialist U.S. financial heartland-center.

The still-growing and evidently quite comfortable convergence between Canada's extreme left and radical Islamist groups is also quite in evidence here. Canadians representing a number of 'peace and social justice' groups made it their business to attend a series of conferences in Egypt named the Cairo Anti-War Conference, initiated by the British Socialist Workers Party, where they mingled with Hamas, Hezbollah and the Muslim Brotherhood.

Solidarity, brothers. Those attending these conferences were urged to take "direct action" to demonstrate unequivocally their dedication to their vision of collective-leftist collaboration. Hit the fat-cat capitalists at every opportunity, and hard. The kind of direct action that Islamist jihadis embrace that translates to violent guerrilla warfare against all entities that refuse to acknowledge the primacy of their vision; the political-religious ideology of conquest.

Westerners think of themselves as being socially advanced, responsible, intelligent and responsive to social needs wherever they are located. These extreme social-conscience entrepreneurs are being manipulated by groups funded by Middle East oil money, who recognize the frailty of mind of the dedicated anti-social elements within Western society with their own penchant for self-abnegation and self-sacrifice.

With the helpful connivance and joyful participation of Canada's very own social and economic and political "activists" - disaffected and largely ignored by the larger stable, socially accepting community - the creeping legion of Islamist Western-society-destroyers have handily manoeuvred themselves into a entry position to launch their corrosive agenda.

Politicizing Charity

"Instead of pushing forward in support of an initiative that could benefit millions, we're allowing the potential for hope and opportunity to be swallowed up by a political debate about abortion that is stifling the potential for progress." (signed) CARE Canada, World Vision Canada, Plan Canada, RESULTS Canada, Save the Children Canada and UNICEF Canada; NGOs involved in convincing Prime Minister Stephen Harper to take up the cause of third-world maternal and child health.

This is mealy mouthed but yet honourable and explicable:

"We want to make sure our funds are used to save the lives of women and children and are used on the many, many things that are available to us that frankly do not divide the Canadian population. Frankly, there is not enough money to do all the things we want to do, even in those areas. We will concentrate our efforts on areas where the Canadian people are united and want to see progress ... highlighting the wide range of initiatives to be funded: training health-care workers treating and preventing disease such as malaria and pneumonia, screening and treating sexually transmitted diseases, immunization, clean water, sanitation and family planning."

BUT NO ABORTIONS!

This is inflatedly portentous:

"This is going to produce a major problem in pursuing a comprehensive strategy for women's health and children's health. I think he's made a grave error."

AND WE'RE GOING TO CLEAN UP ON THIS ONE!

And this is politically, opportunistically divisive:

The government is "in the ridiculous position of failing to defend overseas the rights that Canadian women have here at home."

AND I STOUTLY DEFEND THE RIGHT OF INDIGENT WOMEN TO ABORTION!

The proposed G8 health-care initiative to address the horror of preventable maternal deaths and infant mortality in developing countries due to lack of nutrition, clean water, medicines, health services, education, hygiene and sanitation proposed by the Government of Canada is a noble and needed one. That this government finds itself uncomfortable with providing funding for access to abortions abroad as part of the package is unfortunate.

It does not, however, devalue or degrade the larger move to alter the dreadful statistics on maternal mortality and child deaths that substantially as to account for the opposition parties in Parliament mounting a vociferous assault on the government. This divisive parliament owes its current status to the ongoing attempts by the opposition to diminish the Conservative-led government's accomplishments and status in public opinion.

For the very clear and unfortunate need to burnish their own, sadly lacking in originality and initiative and, truth to tell, honesty. The proposed move to commit to pursuing this agenda within the G8 for the greater good of humanity is one that morally and ethically should be supported without reservations from the opposition benches. The trouble is that the leaders of the opposition parties are so busy opposing everything they've lost their grip on ethical behaviour.

Michael Ignatieff desperately attempts to ingratiate himself with women voters by insisting the government "respect a woman's right to choose", in a situation where the women involved desperately need basic, fundamental, functioning health care. Safe abortion procedures do not exist in Africa; they may begin to, with the assistance of such a program, but it will be funded (how to keep it separate?) by other G8 countries.

Mr. Ignatieff's stertorous condemnations of the government are misplaced and under the circumstances, illogical - compellingly self-interested. This is nasty mischief writ large. Even members of his own party do not agree with him on this issue. As for Mr. Layton; he never did see an opposition band wagon he would hesitate to scramble on.

What do they make of the coercion involved in the United Nations and signal NGOs tying medical and humanitarian aid to contraception use? It may seem like a good idea, but it does impinge upon what cultural groups may very well feel is their right-of-reproduction. If we're going to be ultra-sensitive to all nuances, include that one.

The initiative as it stands, regardless of Canada's position on abortion funding is one welcomed by aid agencies and certainly by the others in the G8, all of which applaud it for the greater good of its intended purpose. The efforts of the opposition, and particularly those of Michael Ignatieff to sully and divert attention from the main project; a rescue mission, are deplorable.

Politics muck-raking compassionate efforts to ameliorate third-world horror scenarios. Shameful!

Maternal Mortality Reduction Program

The Government of Canada has assumed its global responsibilities in leading the G-8 to a reflection of the needs of under-developed countries in ensuring the needs of its most vulnerable will be reckoned with. To aid development in those countries to further the health and longevity of children and their mothers. A concerted effort on the part of the advanced, wealthy countries of the world to put their aid dollars to good use by establishing facilities to offer potable water and sanitation, good nutrition and health care for women and their children.

Women offered the opportunity to educate themselves about family planning and conception, about the intelligent spacing of pregnancies and limiting of same through educational health clinics will be empowered to at least partially reserve for themselves the ability to choose when, whether and how to have children. Exposure to good family planning techniques, to decent hygiene, to healthy food choices for themselves and their children should translate to a healthier population.

That Canada has chosen officially to bypass funding abortion as one of many tools in the workbox of women's childbearing health is unfortunate. Of course, those countries that criticize Canada for that decision, like the United States, talk a good line but internally access to state-paid abortion procedures is politically resisted. Canada's firm decision on refusing to fund abortions abroad is not, however, helpful.

The total package of health-care opportunities offered to poor women in under-developed countries should include abortion. On the other hand, there will be other countries within the G-8 who will fund this option. Still, it's disappointing that the Conservative-led Canadian government, while seemingly complacent about not raising the divisive issue about abortion access within Canada, yet still chooses to resist offering to fund it abroad. Despite what the government asserts, this is not what most Canadians want.

But then, there's an interesting revelation, in connection with this needed assistance to help third-world women overcome maternal morbidity and mortality resulting from lack of proper obstetrics services, overall sanitary conditions, health-required nutrition, safe water and health care. And that is the unspoken-of agenda emanating from sources within the United Nations and NGOs toward population control.

It does make good sense to control the number of births per family to help ensure that mothers are not overburdened by children they cannot attend to adequately, nor afford to raise. That UN and NGO-affiliated programs are linking maternal health programs with safer childbearing, plus population control is interesting.

It can certainly be advantageous to the target community and also to the world at large, diminishing steadily rising population numbers while at the same time ensuring that those births that do occur, are well maintained and the resulting children given the opportunity to grow to maturity. But this exchange of help through availability of funding for maternal health programs, aligned with acceptance of contraception in societies unwilling to accept one for the other, is coercive.

Maternal- and child-health care programs should come without strings attached. If an additional feature of such programs is to convince the target society and the mothers within, that fewer children would make their lives easier, safer, healthier, then such an educational program should be launched, separate and apart from the health-provision aspect.

Fertility reduction and ensuring that maternal health is improved are both laudable goals. They are not mutually exclusive. But both require separate educational programs to succeed in each direction. One need not be tied to the other.

Looking For Mr. Electable

There is one Liberal Member of Parliament whose sensitivities, sensibilities and intelligence stands out among most others of his party's members. He does not appear ever to have considered running for the leadership of his party. It may likely be that he does not appear to others to be an inspired leader.

It's possible that he is more dedicated to being a human being and attempting in his own small way to help where he can, than in being, let us say, political. This is a man who spends his 'leisure time' in Third-World countries mentoring and applying his civilian trade to the ill and the impoverished.

He is currently giving advice to the Conservative-led government of Prime Minister Stephen Harper. Of course, the prime minister is no laggard in the creative intelligence department either, and it would appear that even without Dr. Martin's recommendation, he may have led himself to a similar conclusion.

With respect to the hiccoughs in his current truly inspired G8 plan to take impressively-dedicated steps to improve the health of women and children in those Third-World countries.
Where some half-million lives are lost every year during pregnancy and childbirth. And children often don't live beyond infancy. Where malaria and other endemic diseases take too many lives.
Where malnutrition and lack of primary health care are realities of their existence.

Since there are lawmakers in all parties who are burdened with a conscience that will not permit them to agree to abortion-provision as part and portion of aiding and assisting poor women abroad, and the prime minister appears to have no wish to include it as an asset when required, in family planning or pregnancy-cessation, the idea that Mr. Martin brings is timely. And worth studying, and implementing.

That each country of the G8 could voluntarily assume one element of the processes whereby maternal health and longevity could be improved.

"For example, Canada could be the lead nation on training health care workers and micronutrients, another country could focus on providing medications, another on access to family planning and safe abortions, etc. This would enable Mr. Harper to move forward with an effective plan of action while being sensitive to the views on abortion of some of his members", offered Mr. Martin.

Sensible to the nth degree.