A longtime rural resident, I use my 60 plus years of life learning to opinionate here and elsewhere on the “interweb” on everything from politics to environmental issues. A believer in reasonable discourse rather than unhelpful attacks I try to give positive input to the blogesphere, so feel free to comment upon rural issues or anything else posted here. But don’t be surprised if you comments get zapped if you are not polite in your replys.
Tuesday, December 25, 2012
Monday, December 17, 2012
Elizabeth May
Regular reader will know I am a
supporter of Elizabeth May and her constant fight for our democracy,
this post from Owen
over at Norther Reflections caught my eye and bears repeating.
“As 2012 draws to a close, Michael
Harris reviews the
state of all of Canada's federal parties -- except the Bloc
Quebecois. He has some insightful comments about each. But I am
particularly struck by what he writes about Elizabeth May and The
Green Party:
For now, the Green Party is Elizabeth May. Despite all the institutional barricades erected in front of this prodigiously hard-working politician, she tears the pant leg off the government on everything from the environment to the Canada-as-resource-colony model promoted by our CEO-PM himself. She runs the most intellectually alive office on Parliament Hill. The place is staffed by people who walk through the door just to be around her and to help.
But 2013 will be frustrating because May’s message of unification, the only certain answer to Harpocracy, will fall on the ears of two relatively newly-elected leaders, both of whom think they will be able to get the job done alone. At some point, the Greens must elect more members, since not even Elizabeth May can run on empty. If this woman isn’t allowed to take part in the next TV debates, we should all watch the shopping channel.
May's task is difficult because the other leaders aren't buying co-operation as the answer to the Harper juggernaut. And, until she is joined by other members of her party, Mr. Mulcair -- and whoever leads the Liberals -- will continue to ignore her.
That situation is truly tragic.......
Sad but probably true Owen!
Sunday, December 16, 2012
Bluewater Teachers Walk Out Wednesday
More than one thousand teachers with
the Bluewater public school board will walk out on Wednesday December
19th. The board has issued a news release Sunday morning -- and it
states all elementary schools will be closed on Wednesday. Those
include the J-K to Grade 12 schools on the Bruce Peninsula and in
Walkerton.
I find it hard to believe that the
majority of highly educated, well paid and dedicated teachers fully
support this action but feel that they have little choice but to go along
with the 'decree' by their union who have already threatened them
with a daily fine of $500 simply for helping kids out of normal
mandated working hours. Naturally non of them will speak out as 'peer
pressure' (read union action) would in all probability make their
life very difficult if not threaten their employment.
If am am wrong in that assessment then
my respect for those that choose the teaching profession as a way to
make a living will be substantially diminished, those that truly do it
for the love of teaching and are appalled at the ever increasing
confrontational conflict over simply trying to keep our educational
system affordable to the average taxpayer have my sympathy.
Thursday, November 22, 2012
Elizabeth May: Parliamentarian of the Year.
This week MPs, senators and the media gathered in the Adam Room of
the The Fairmont Château Laurier for the 6th
annual Parliamentarians of the Year awards ceremony.Green
Leader Elizabeth May was named Parliamentarian of the Year.
In an interview with Aaron Wherry's for article in Macleans she spoke about the state of our Parliamentary Democracy, below is a small extract..
Read more of this article
In an interview with Aaron Wherry's for article in Macleans she spoke about the state of our Parliamentary Democracy, below is a small extract..
“I love parliamentary democracy. I am
fascinated by procedure. I’m beside myself with the way things are
slipping.” What follows then is a 524-word dissertation—stretching
from the slightest breach of decorum to the profound questions of
power at the heart of our system—on the state of parliamentary
democracy in Ottawa.
“I know it sounds small, but you’re not supposed to have
members of Parliament standing and waiting their turn because they
know when they’re going to be called and they have their speech
ready and they’ve got the little podium and they’ve got a written
speech in front of them and they’re standing while someone else is
speaking. No one is supposed to stand except the person that’s been
recognized by the Speaker and until you’re recognized by the
Speaker you’re not supposed to stand. I know these may seem like
small points, but it’s indicative of a failure to recognize that
the respect for traditions in the House of Commons may start with
things like one person stands at a time and only when recognized by
the Speaker. And as soon as the Speaker stands, the person who’s in
full oratory flight is supposed to sit down. Those are things that
when you ignore that you also can get away with having a prime
minister who ignores all parliamentary tradition and prorogues—well,
not all, because Sir John A. Macdonald did it once and then paid for
it by losing power—but you’re not supposed to prorogue the House
of Commons to avoid a political difficulty. So a failure to respect
our traditions of Stephen Harper proroguing twice then launched into
Dalton McGuinty proroguing. This is very unhealthy for democracy.
Because we are a Westminster parliamentary democracy and tradition
and if we don’t pay attention and respect Parliament, then we are
allowing the Prime Minister’s Office, which doesn’t exist as an
entity in our constitution, it’s not like the executive branch and
the White House in the U.S. constitution—the notion of a Prime
Minister’s Office as an entity in the machinery of government is
simply an invention, but it’s like a cancerous growth. And as the
Prime Minister’s Office grows, and this is a trend we started with
Pierre Trudeau in a much more innocuous way, it’s not reached its
apex, but if we don’t do anything to stop it, what else will the
next prime minister do? And as the PMO grows into being the
all-powerful decision-maker, leaving cabinet ministers, basically
their job appears to be the primary public relations spokesperson for
an area of policy they had nothing to do with developing, it’s
dangerous to health of democracy. So respect for Parliament, to me,
is synonymous with respect for democracy. And I respect Parliament
and that’s where the work is happening. I respect … there’s
very few ministers who actually, actually I can only think of one,
who sit though parliamentary debate on their own bills. And that’s,
and should I say for credit where credit’s due, Jason Kenney. When
his bills are being debated and when I rise to criticize his
legislation, he actually knows what I’m talking about and will make
a reasoned defence of his own legislation. But for the most part,
it’s like a ritualized form of theatre. And that’s dangerous.
It’s not just a relic, sort of an anachronism, that we still have
parliamentary democracy. That’s the system. And the problem is PMO,
not Parliament.”Read more of this article
Wednesday, November 7, 2012
Wind Turbine Health Report
Our own local Medical Officer of Health has been asked
to do a health study on the effects of industrial wind turbines
upon the predominantly rural residents that have had these part time
wind driven generators built in their backyards. I doubt that she has
the necessary resources to do a proper study and there has been much
reluctance to previously do so by both the wind industry and
government. However there is now at least one independent study that
has been published that confirms what many of those affected have
been saying.
The study — “Effects of industrial wind turbine noise on sleep and health” — assessed two wind farm communities in Maine and whilst limited in scope does conclude that some folks are indeed negatively affected even at a distance of over 1km.
The study concludes “that the noise emissions of IWTs (industrial wind turbines) disturbed the sleep and caused daytime sleepiness and impaired mental health in residents living within 1.4 km of the two IWT installations studied. Industrial wind turbine noise is a further source of environmental noise, with the potential to harm human health. Current regulations seem to be insufficient to adequately protect the human population living close to IWTs. Our research suggests that adverse effects are observed at distances even beyond 1 km. Further research is needed to determine at what distances risks become negligible, as well as to better estimate the portion of the population suffering from adverse effects at a given distance.”
It should be noted that this study only considered noise concerns and did not address other things raised by those living near such 'wind farms'. I for one wonder why there is a moratorium of offshore wind farms that are distant from human habitation and not one on those that continue to spring up all across rural Ontario where the residents and indeed local municipal councils are helpless to stop them.
There may well be a necessity to supplement out power supply this way but until a means of storing the output from such intermittent sources of power and local residents concerns are given more weight I find it very difficult to view this technology in a positive light.
Perhaps this report will give a little more weight to rural residents concerns. Full report 800k PDF
The study — “Effects of industrial wind turbine noise on sleep and health” — assessed two wind farm communities in Maine and whilst limited in scope does conclude that some folks are indeed negatively affected even at a distance of over 1km.
The study concludes “that the noise emissions of IWTs (industrial wind turbines) disturbed the sleep and caused daytime sleepiness and impaired mental health in residents living within 1.4 km of the two IWT installations studied. Industrial wind turbine noise is a further source of environmental noise, with the potential to harm human health. Current regulations seem to be insufficient to adequately protect the human population living close to IWTs. Our research suggests that adverse effects are observed at distances even beyond 1 km. Further research is needed to determine at what distances risks become negligible, as well as to better estimate the portion of the population suffering from adverse effects at a given distance.”
It should be noted that this study only considered noise concerns and did not address other things raised by those living near such 'wind farms'. I for one wonder why there is a moratorium of offshore wind farms that are distant from human habitation and not one on those that continue to spring up all across rural Ontario where the residents and indeed local municipal councils are helpless to stop them.
There may well be a necessity to supplement out power supply this way but until a means of storing the output from such intermittent sources of power and local residents concerns are given more weight I find it very difficult to view this technology in a positive light.
Perhaps this report will give a little more weight to rural residents concerns. Full report 800k PDF
Sunday, October 28, 2012
Committee Work
Or perhaps better titled seeking
consensus within a committee! I have recently become involved with a
major project to rebuild & update the internet presence of a
local organization that, in that it is not really a corporate entity
nor really simply a 'club but rests somewhere between those two,
seeks consensus via a committee. Having been involved in a number
committees over the years both formal in a work setting, and informal
in a club setting, as well as having been on the executive of several
clubs I can say that the approach to such committee work varies
considerably. Some run very formally with very structured discussions
and a recorded vote upon issues where the majority rules, others may
allow extensive discussion but in the end what the chairperson wants
is what gets done (something like how the Harper 'government' works).
In most cases the preferred option is to build consensus, where there
is disagreement we should try to find middle ground, seek compromise
between two opposing positions and leave everybody in a position that
they can say “I can live with that”.
“A
committee is a thing which takes a week to do what one good man can
do in an hour.” - Elbert Hubbard
In my view this is by far the best way
to approach working with or for a committee, if members of a group go
away disgruntled that their point of view did not get heard or was
dismissed arbitrarily then they will not be receptive to your point
of view in the future, and if working in a volunteer capacity may
well decide to go on to other less frustrating activities. Seeking
such consensus will inevitably lead to extended discussions which
center around the various options available and the personal opinion
of each participant at the table, such things can often go around and
around interminably, it is the chairs job to decide at which point to
bring such 'discussions' to a head without offending anyone. This can
often be difficult when strong opinions are held.
“A
committee is organic rather than mechanical in its nature: it is not
a structure but a plant. It takes root and grows, it flowers, wilts,
and dies, scattering the seed from which other committees will bloom
in their turn.” - C. Northcote Parkinson
With modern communications such
'discussions' often take place at virtual meetings by a series of
emails, this is a great way to get things done without dragging folks
to a central location every couple of days but it has its own set of
pitfalls. The first is the tendency when replying to someone who has
responsibility for one particular issue of replying to just them and
not including all the group, emails should almost always have a copy
to all members. This may result in some folks getting reams of
emails which they have little need to reply to but they are kept 'in
the loop', do not feel they are being passed by regarding the topic
and can always ignore them if they wish. The second thing to beware
of is how quickly and almost without thought we all hit that 'send'
button, true it takes a little longer to screw up when typing than
when speaking directly (at least for one finger keyboard peckers like
me) but once sent your thoughts are documented and non retrievable.
Having such conversations 'documented' is in the whole scheme of
thing a good thing in that previous input, decisions and opinions can
be reviewed without the '”but you said.....” arguments, which
is why it is important to review your text before hitting send.
“To
get something done a committee should consist of no more than three
people, two of whom are absent.” - Robert Copeland
I am guilty on that score all to often,
whilst articles like this one are assembled over several days and
reviewed numerous times before publication I tend to treat email
'conversations' much the same as face to face conversations and reply
with my immediate reaction without thinking it through. This can
often result in one or more 'I forgot to say....' follow up emails
which can be most disconcerting for the recipients. I find one way to
avoid that is to formulate each answer to a complex and ongoing issue
in a document as they emerge and then review and edit it at the end
of the day before sending it off. This can slow down the 'discussion'
sometimes but often clarifies the issues and certainly give one time
to 'rethink' your response.
“Any
committee is only as good as the most knowledgeable, determined and
vigorous person on it. There must be somebody who provides the
flame.” - Claudia Lady Bird Johnson
I am sure my fellow committee members
will be interested to read this and it remains to be seen if I
practice what I preach! If my primary goal of fostering open and
honest discussion is met then I am sure they will let me know. I hope
I can provide that 'Flame'! In that regard I must now 'review' this
post before publication and add a brief summary how I believe a
committee meeting should proceed be it face to face or online in some
form.
- Foster open and honest discussions where no idea or opinion is dismissed without due consideration.
- Try to keep the discussions focused but know when to move on when consensus cannot be reached.
- Beware excluding any member from a discussion, particularly one with whom you disagree.
- Think before you speak or hit that send button, your remarks may be misconstrued by some..
- Review and summarize your discussions frequently in order to clarify the status of issue under consideration.
- Above all do not take critique as a personal attack, you SHOULD all be working towards the same goal and finding flaws in any proposal is a GOOD thing.
In this case the committee of one
reached complete consensus on the text of this post!
Tuesday, October 23, 2012
Thousands of Lakes and Rivers left unprotected.
This from
the Sixth Estate which deserves to be re-posted in full
“As I noted previously, the Navigable Waters Act is being renamed the Navigation Protection Act and the environmental protection which the federal government once extended, basically, to any body of water you could paddle a canoe on is now being restricted to a special shortlist of 62 rivers and 97 lakes (plus the three oceans). In a country that has tens of thousands of rivers and lakes, obviously this is going to involve a great deal of environmental and legislative carnage. Last post, I noted that this removed the majority of Canada’s longest rivers from protection under the navigable waters law.
Today I’d like to do the same thing for lakes. According to Wikipedia, Canada has about 32,000 lakes “larger than three square kilometres” and 561 lakes “larger than 100″ square kilometres. The first list is obviously too long to go into here: it goes without saying that 97 out of 32,000 is not very impressive. (Plus there are some that are not that large yet still are protected: for instance, the Conservatives took special care to protect a small puddle in the middle of Ottawa called Dow’s Lake, which I can’t imagine is that large, though I could be wrong.) There’s not even any point working with the list of 561 lakes, since I can already tell you without looking that more than 85% of them can’t be on the list, mathematically speaking.
What we can do, though, is look at Natural Resources Canada’s list of lakes over 400 square kilometres — that is, the very largest lakes in Canada. From there, we can see that the federal government has failed to include three of B.C.’s five largest lakes (Babine, Atlin, and Ootsa); all of Alberta’s largest lakes; and, as with the rivers, has all but written off the northern territories as free and ungoverned.
For strict comparison purposes, I decided to shorten the list even further, to just those lakes over 1000 square kilometres. Only 15 of Canada’s 43 largest lakes — lakes over 1000 square kilometres — are now protected as navigable waters. Those that didnt’ make the cut include lakes Aberdeen, Bras D’Or, Lesser Slave, Lac la Ronge, Cree Lake, the Gouin Reservoir, Lac Seul, Lac Mistassini, and the Smallwood Reservoir, Lac Manicouagan, and the Robert Bourassa reservoir.
“As I noted previously, the Navigable Waters Act is being renamed the Navigation Protection Act and the environmental protection which the federal government once extended, basically, to any body of water you could paddle a canoe on is now being restricted to a special shortlist of 62 rivers and 97 lakes (plus the three oceans). In a country that has tens of thousands of rivers and lakes, obviously this is going to involve a great deal of environmental and legislative carnage. Last post, I noted that this removed the majority of Canada’s longest rivers from protection under the navigable waters law.
Today I’d like to do the same thing for lakes. According to Wikipedia, Canada has about 32,000 lakes “larger than three square kilometres” and 561 lakes “larger than 100″ square kilometres. The first list is obviously too long to go into here: it goes without saying that 97 out of 32,000 is not very impressive. (Plus there are some that are not that large yet still are protected: for instance, the Conservatives took special care to protect a small puddle in the middle of Ottawa called Dow’s Lake, which I can’t imagine is that large, though I could be wrong.) There’s not even any point working with the list of 561 lakes, since I can already tell you without looking that more than 85% of them can’t be on the list, mathematically speaking.
What we can do, though, is look at Natural Resources Canada’s list of lakes over 400 square kilometres — that is, the very largest lakes in Canada. From there, we can see that the federal government has failed to include three of B.C.’s five largest lakes (Babine, Atlin, and Ootsa); all of Alberta’s largest lakes; and, as with the rivers, has all but written off the northern territories as free and ungoverned.
For strict comparison purposes, I decided to shorten the list even further, to just those lakes over 1000 square kilometres. Only 15 of Canada’s 43 largest lakes — lakes over 1000 square kilometres — are now protected as navigable waters. Those that didnt’ make the cut include lakes Aberdeen, Bras D’Or, Lesser Slave, Lac la Ronge, Cree Lake, the Gouin Reservoir, Lac Seul, Lac Mistassini, and the Smallwood Reservoir, Lac Manicouagan, and the Robert Bourassa reservoir.
What more can be
said the attack upon the environmental protection of our Natural
Heritage by the Harper Regimen continues without pause.
Wednesday, October 17, 2012
Rural Internet Survey Results
Survey Results.
A
couple of months ago in order to try and get an idea of what
reaction folks would have to a forum dedicated to Rural Affairs and
how many rural folk were restricted in their internet access and thus
we perhaps less inclined to use such communication methods I
posted a survey on these pages. Having been very disappointed
with the lack of data emerging from a more comprehensive survey by
the Woman’s Institute of Ontario in their Rural Voices project I
promised to share any results with my readers for all to see.
Here then are the results to date,
please note that the response was understandably very small given my
readership and that any online survey asking about internet use is
automatically biased by both the method of data collection and by
those inclined to answer such surveys. That said here are the
results.
Response Percent |
|||
Rural Respondents | 57.10% | ||
Urban Respondents | 42.90% | ||
Type of internet connection. (Choice) | |||
Response Percent |
|||
Cable or wireless 200k - 1m bps | 35.70% | ||
Hub or Stick 50k - 200k bps | 28.60% | ||
Greater than 1 m bps | 28.60% | ||
Dialup less than 50k bps | 7.10% | ||
No connection at home | 0.00% | ||
Internet connection limits (choice) | |||
Response Percent |
|||
Unlimited | 35.70% | ||
10 Mb or less without extra charge | 28.60% | ||
3 Mb or less without extra charge | 21.40% | ||
Over 10 Mb without extra charge but not unlimited | 14.30% | ||
Most used online discussion methods (multiple choice) | |||
Response Percent |
|||
Online forum or discussion sites | 57.10% | ||
Email 'lists' and digests | 50.00% | ||
Online bulletin boards | 35.70% | ||
Online audio conferencing | 21.40% | ||
Online video chat or conferencing | 14.30% | ||
Online chat sites | 7.10% | ||
None of the above | 42.90% | ||
Use by respondents of a Forum dedicated to Rural matters. (Choice) | |||
Response Percent |
|||
Perhaps, depending upon how it was used / presented | 64.30% | ||
Yes | 21.40% | ||
Yes, if it were local content | 7.10% | ||
Not probable | 7.10% | ||
No, I hate online forums. | 0.00% | ||
How respondents get information about their LOCAL community (Ranked) | |||
Rank (only top 3 choices shown) | 1 | 2 | 3 |
Directly from others in the community (face to face) | 46.20% | 23.10% | 0.00% |
Via the Internet | 30.80% | 7.70% | 38.50% |
By email | 7.70% | 30.80% | 7.70% |
From the local newspaper | 7.70% | 15.40% | 7.70% |
From radio or TV | 7.70% | 7.70% | 23.10% |
By phone from others in the community | 0.00% | 15.40% | 23.10% |
Some notes and comments upon the
results:-
Examination of the individual responses
indicate that the majority of those with high speed unlimited
connections are urban residents whilst most of those with less than
optimal connections are rural citizens, this is as expected and
reflects the patchy availability such services in rural areas.
100% of those who did use some kind of
online discussion method (excluding 'social media') visited Forums of
some kind but more than 1 in 4 did not use any such methods of
exchanging information. Given that this was an online survey this is
a little surprising, perhaps they are enamored with facebook &
twitter which I do not regard as a place for serious discussion and
information sharing.
Even given the above nearly all the
respondents said they WOULD use a forum dedicated to rural matters
although most said it would depend upon how it was presented.
Almost half said that most of their
local information was obtained by face to face communications however
the internet came in a strong second, email, radio, TV &
newspapers all showed up as generally the 3rd, 4th
or 5th choices.
All in all an interesting glimpse of
something which we need a lot more information about, StatsCan does
have figures on internet use but as far as I can tell no information
as to the type of connection by rural / urban split. Unfortunately
due to the very small sampling of this survey such information
remains elusive, any pointers to more information in this regard
would be greatly appreciated..
The link to the survey will remain valid for a while, feel free to add your data to it. If the results change substantially with more respondents I will update the results.
The link to the survey will remain valid for a while, feel free to add your data to it. If the results change substantially with more respondents I will update the results.
Thursday, September 27, 2012
Time Flies
Its been almost a month since I have
posted anything here and given my belief that even the most
interested of readers will not visit a blog or web site if it has
nothing new to offer that is not good. Not that my massive readership
(all 5 or 6 of you) is why I write, as with most personal blogs its
more to let off steam than anything else, although I must say that
sharing information is also a big part of it. My posts regarding
rural internet and broadcast TV continue to receive more 'hits' than
almost anything else!
If you are waiting to see the results
of the internet survey you will have to wait a little while longer,
the response has not been exactly overwhelming so I am going to give
it another month before I share the data. If you have not already
done so please spend the 30 seconds or so it takes to make the thing
a little more meaningful. Link to the right.
My excuse for not posting is that
somehow things here in the woods got away from me, one minuite its
mid summer with weather that was previously reserved for the mid US
(Dry & Hot) the next thing I know October is almost upon us. It
did not help that the last month has been spent putting up a sizable
pole barn to store yet more 'stuff'. Mrs & Master Rural are
hoping that they can get their vehicle in out of the snow and I would
dearly like to get the tractor & blower in so as not to have to
dig it out before blowing that white stuff that invariably fills the
driveway. You can see that even without all the leftover wood (which
means I DID cut enough last fall to finish the job) AND various pieces of
equipment that no longer fit in the other shed there is already a
space conflict!
We normally try and get back around our
trails several times a month, its usually a Sunday morning stroll,
but today was the first time we have been back in the bust for weeks.
The canopy of green is slowly fading and disappearing and the extra
light is greening up the forest floor and filling in the trails with
greenery! Yet another thing that did not get done this year......
trail maintenance! It is amassing how quickly nature takes over if
boots and wheels and mowers and snips are not in regular use along
the forest floor. Much of that will happen shortly if we want to stay
warm NEXT winter as the search for, and felling of, trees for
fuel-wood must commence soon, this years supply just now having been
split and tucked away in the woodshed in anticipation of colder
weather.
So all in all I have a few excuses for
not writing and I could no doubt find a few more, after all my brain
is just as old as my arthritic knees and at times just as functional.
That said I do believe in that old adage 'use it or loose it' so
today’s exercise is to ramble through these pages as well as the
bush trails. You may join me at either place.
Sunday, September 2, 2012
Rural Internet Survey
A couple of weeks ago we posted an
online survey designed to find out what type of internet connection
the majority of rural folks had and how many of them used or were
interested in online forums. This to promote the formation of a forum
dedicated to rural communities across Ontario and / or Canada.
The readership of this blog is not
exactly overwhelming, it only sees about 600 'page reads' a month and
the response to the survey has been considerably less than that. Thus
far 100% of the respondents have been urban residents so if you are a
rural citizen and are reading this please fill out the very brief
survey linked at the end of this post and in the side bar.
The results thus far indicate that
those 'urban' folks who did respond nearly all have high speed
unlimited internet, use online forums and email 'lists of digests'
and are open to using a Rural Forum if it is formatted to their
liking. They get their community information mostly from face to face
meetings and the internet and less so from newspaper and radio, this
is a surprise to me but I suspect that those who view my blog and
filled out the survey are hardly 'typical'. As I have said before
such surveys, indeed any survey, is biased by both the distribution
of it and by those who are inclined to answer such things. This then
is a long way form a 'scientific' poll but just a effort to gain a
little more insight as to how my readers get their information and
whether their internet connection affects their use of online forums
and the like.
Please take a look at the survey and
consider filling it out particularly if you live in rural Canada, it
consists of just 6 questions and may be found here:-
http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/GZZYVPK
The initial results can be viewed here ,this post will be updated and the survey discontinued on or before Nov 30 2012
Friday, August 24, 2012
Rural Satellite TV
Regular readers will know I
have written extensively over the last year about the loss of
broadcast TV in rural areas and it still seems counter productive
to provide OTA digital TV in urban areas where it is readily
available inexpensively via cable but not in rural areas where the
only alternative is the more expensive satellite TV solution. Shaw
Direct has provided a solution however so long as you apply before
November for their Local Television Satellite Solution (LTSS)
program.
I first became aware of this program
via
the TVO web page detailing all the transmitters being shut down.
It says:-
If you live in one of these markets and
have been relying on television from over the air signals, you may be
able to continue to receive TVO courtesy of Shaw Direct by applying
for their Local Television Satellite Solution (LTSS) program.
For more information visit SHAWDIRECT.CA/DTV.
If you haven't been a cable or satellite customer in the last 90 days, you may be eligible for the Local Television Satellite Solution (LTSS) program.* This program will allow you to continue receiving the same or similar Canadian over-the-air channels you've always enjoyed courtesy of Shaw Direct.
Please call one of our service representatives before November 30, 2012 at 1.888.782.7602 to see if you qualify.
Having applied and been “approved”
I now know that one must sign a waiver with a few conditions
including not having had “been a subscriber to any Cable, IPTV or
Satellite TV provider within the
last 90 days“ and detailing the
channels that you have lost (although the form assumes the loss of
certain stations in your area and pre-prints them for you).
You also “agree to become a Shaw
Direct LTSS subscriber. Shaw Direct will provide you with a receiver
and basic installation at no charge in order to provide your
household with local programming. The receiver will be able to meet
the technical needs of the channels we are providing. The receiver
will also be considered to be your property. The programming will
consist of local programming feeds from within your geographic
region. This programming will be provided to you at no cost. New
customers to this program are only permitted from May 31, 2011 until
November 30, 2012. If we have not received this form signed
within this time, we will be unable to provide this solution.”
All in all it just took that phone
call, was hassle free, totally without cost, installation and
receiver included and we now have 9 or 10 'local channels' including
CTV, CBC, GLOBAL, TVO which is about all we really need. Thanks Shaw,
I am sure up the road you will be 'encouraging' us to get the 'pay
for' channels (and by all accounts all that now takes is a phone call
to Shaw Customer Service) but for now we are quite happy and
impressed with your promotional LTSS program.
Lost your broadcast TV? Give Shaw a
call, it seems too good to be true but thus far we have seen no
hidden problems or costs.
Sunday, August 19, 2012
Womens Institute releases Rural Voices Report.
Regular readers will know that I have
been supportive of the WI's RVN project and
have written both here, on their forum and
directly to them about how an on line rural forum would benefit rural
communities, and suggested what form it could or should take. I have
been waiting to see the results of their survey since it completion
in May and SOME results have now been released
in the form of a Management Report.
Unfortunately said report is not very
forthcoming and only details the top 5 responses in a limited number
of areas of interest. We are told that a “Detailed Report” is
available, however upon inquiry we were told that “The only
information being released at this time is the promised Management
Report and the poster.” and that “Any additional details are not
being released as they will be used to assist with sourcing
additional grants.” Huh? I am not sure how withholding data
from a pubic survey of 'rural stakeholders” from those self same
“stakeholders” can enhance a future grant application.
They also say that “ the budget
limited quantitative and qualitative analysis in all areas and on all
variables”. I understand that such limitations may preclude
academic and scholarly “analysis” but as one who distrusts such
“analysis” without seeing the raw data from which is was drawn I
feel that perhaps this whole process and report is focused far too
much on possible grants for some academic to analyze the results
rather than sharing with those who participated and those who could
use the data to move forward with practical initiatives. Let us
“analyze” the results for ourselves!
One thing does become clear from the
report and that is that the survey is biased by the type of
respondent, this is no fault of the project creators, any such
'survey' is biased. An on line survey such
as the one at the end of this article is biased towards those
that are on line and are inclined to answer such things, in this case
it was biased towards members of the WI and those already involved in
their community and thus were aware of the project or were sent a
survey by mail. This resulted in a predominance of older ladies
responding (hardly a surprise give that it is a Women's Institute
project) which is one of the few pieces of hard data shared in the
report. This obviously affects the results.
As readers will know if they have read
my previous posts about this I was mainly interested and highly
supportive of the stated
goal of creating a “Web portal designed to
foster a living ‘Rural Voices Network’ to facilitate community
engagement and collaboration through online forums.” The survey
was, in part, to determine how viable this goal was and how to
proceed with it. I do not see the lack of funding as a major
impediment to moving forward with such a 'portal' using volunteers to
do both the initial installation and the subsequent moderation,
although deciding upon the format and the software may be much more
of a challenge. There is little or nothing said regarding this item,
which to my mind is one of the major keys to rural communication and
thus enabling discussion and 'engagement' in the community. There is
an “existing
web portal for further online engagement of
rural citizens” on the RVN site but it is less than stellar and
far less user friendly and functional than what I had in mind.
I will not go into the few results they
have published, you
can read the report for yourselves. I do note
however that “As with the lack of information, younger residents
rated a lack of communication networks as being more of a barrier
than did older residents.” and it is the younger folks who we have
to engage! I will however comment upon some of the conclusions made.
The featured recommendations highlighted here are small extracts of
the full text.
Recommendation #1:
In order to communicate with
rural people, stakeholders and policy-makers may need to reduce their
reliance on buzzwords and jargon.
Agreed, however it is not a matter of
talking down to “rural people” but more a problem with academics
and consultants using flowery language to justify their work when
simple and concise language is usually far more precise.
Recommendation #2:
This data holds knowledge that
could potentially lead to better-informed policy. Carefully planned
analysis of this data, aligned with the goals of the RVN project,
may provide insights to the current situation of rural
residents.....
By all means 'analyze' the data but do
not 'spin' it to “align with the goals of the RVN project”.
Let others also see and use the raw data and detailed report and make
their own conclusions.
Recommendation #3:
..... continued engagement with
those individuals, organizations and communities that have made
connections with the RVN project should be ensured by encouraging the
continuation of the conversation
Obviously!
Recommendation #4:
More and stronger connections
need to be made:.........
A means of facilitating these
types of connections and fostering potential relationships –
through a workshop or conference, for example – should be
investigated.
Whilst 'workshops or conferences' may
be useful they are limited by location, who is invited, who can
attend and similar factors. An ON
LINE forum is much wider in its availability
and is a continuous process. Both are reliant upon interested
citizens being aware of them so that they can make those
'connections'.
Recommendation #5:
Although this knowledge is
valuable to have, in order for it to have real worth, this knowledge
should be acted upon. The RVN project committee should find a method
and means by which this information can be put into productive
use. The implementation of this knowledge may take any of a number of
forms ranging from a simple dissemination of the information
to developing a series of public forums.
The single biggest 'action' that the
RVN can take to make productive use of the knowledge gained through
this project is to SHARE it. The same limitations that apply to
conferences also apply to public forums.
Having waited for some time to see if
the results of this survey would shed any light upon how well an on
line forum would be received, but not being a recipient of any
information in that regard, I now will move on and be seeking to
create such a web presence privately. Build it and they will come
will be my mantra. We MUST get a dialog going, even as I write I
learn of more rural communities being gutted of their schools and
inundated with industrial wind farms to feed the urban appetite for
“clean” power. Neither of which rural resident have ANY control
over!
Anyone, individual or rural
organization interested in helping should contact me ASAP.
Please visit and fill out the survey
I created to try and get a better idea of rural online availability
and use.. Just 6 questions and results WILL be shared. Click
here to see the survey.
Sunday, August 12, 2012
Meet Enbridge's friend Dil Bit
The
following statement was made by Miranda Holmes at the National Energy
Board's Joint Review Panel hearings into the proposed Enbridge
Northern Gateway Pipeline in Comox, BC.
Hi, my name’s Dil Bit. That’s short for Diluted Bitumen, but I feel like I’m amongst friends here, so let’s not be too formal.
I come from the tar sands and, as you know, Alberta totally digs me. Alberta’s so generous she wants to share me with everyone.
If she gets her way, I’ll be passing through British Columbia a lot in the future, so I thought I should introduce myself properly.
As fossil fuels go, I’m a bit unconventional. But, as Alberta’s favourite son Steve will tell you, I’m totally ethical. (And don’t let those jet setting celebrities tell you any different.)
I’m also way better than conventional crude oil.
For instance, my total acid concentrations are up to 20 times higher than conventional crude. My sulphur content is up to 10 times higher and I’m up to 70 times thicker. Pretty impressive, eh?
Yeah, it’s true I can be a bit abrasive. Bits of quartz, pyrite, silicates, sure I carry them around. It’s just the way I’m made.
So conventional crude doesn’t have my grit. So what? No need to point out, like those granola eaters at the Natural Resources Defense Council did, that putting me in a pipeline is “like sandblasting the inside of the pipe.”
I don’t know why the Americans have taken against me, because – like so many of them – I pack some serious heat. Thanks to my true grit and my thickness (I like to think of it as strength), I make pipes hotter than conventional crude - and harder to monitor. In fact, pipelines carrying me are16 times more likely to leak.
See? I told you I was better.
I’m Alberta’s most precious resource. You think she and Steve are going to let just anyone transport me? No way.
For my travels through British Columbia, they’re going to use Enbridge, a fine, upstanding company with an excellent track record. Why, it took Enbridge 10 years to spill half as much oil as the Exxon Valdez. And they didn’t just spill it in one spot – they spread it around.
Regulators in the US thought the three million litres of me Enbridge spilled in Michigan was so funny they compared the company to those great comedy characters the Keystone Kops.
If Enbridge maintains its current success rate it should be able to meet Steve’s federal standards, which allow undetected pipeline leaks of less than 2% of capacity per week.
For the Northern Gateway project that means Enbridge could legally leave 11 million litres of me a week behind on my way to Kitimat without getting into any serious trouble. And why should they? Eleven million litres of me would be more than three times funnier than Michigan, right?
That’s good news for me, because I’ve heard there are some mighty pretty places in northern BC and I think it would be a shame not to get to know them better.
And it’s good news for BC, because your premier’s promising lots of jobs out of oil and gas exports, and cleaning up after me will sure keep people employed.
Sorry if any of the spots I’m going to wreck is one of your favourites, but I’ve got to keep Alberta happy. You know what she’s like.
-------------------------------------------------------------
Many voices have been heard during these hearings, yet one has
remained silent: the oily character at the centre of the debate. I
think that’s a shame and so I am using my time before the panel to
allow this character’s case to be made.Hi, my name’s Dil Bit. That’s short for Diluted Bitumen, but I feel like I’m amongst friends here, so let’s not be too formal.
I come from the tar sands and, as you know, Alberta totally digs me. Alberta’s so generous she wants to share me with everyone.
If she gets her way, I’ll be passing through British Columbia a lot in the future, so I thought I should introduce myself properly.
As fossil fuels go, I’m a bit unconventional. But, as Alberta’s favourite son Steve will tell you, I’m totally ethical. (And don’t let those jet setting celebrities tell you any different.)
I’m also way better than conventional crude oil.
For instance, my total acid concentrations are up to 20 times higher than conventional crude. My sulphur content is up to 10 times higher and I’m up to 70 times thicker. Pretty impressive, eh?
Yeah, it’s true I can be a bit abrasive. Bits of quartz, pyrite, silicates, sure I carry them around. It’s just the way I’m made.
So conventional crude doesn’t have my grit. So what? No need to point out, like those granola eaters at the Natural Resources Defense Council did, that putting me in a pipeline is “like sandblasting the inside of the pipe.”
I don’t know why the Americans have taken against me, because – like so many of them – I pack some serious heat. Thanks to my true grit and my thickness (I like to think of it as strength), I make pipes hotter than conventional crude - and harder to monitor. In fact, pipelines carrying me are16 times more likely to leak.
See? I told you I was better.
I’m Alberta’s most precious resource. You think she and Steve are going to let just anyone transport me? No way.
For my travels through British Columbia, they’re going to use Enbridge, a fine, upstanding company with an excellent track record. Why, it took Enbridge 10 years to spill half as much oil as the Exxon Valdez. And they didn’t just spill it in one spot – they spread it around.
Regulators in the US thought the three million litres of me Enbridge spilled in Michigan was so funny they compared the company to those great comedy characters the Keystone Kops.
If Enbridge maintains its current success rate it should be able to meet Steve’s federal standards, which allow undetected pipeline leaks of less than 2% of capacity per week.
For the Northern Gateway project that means Enbridge could legally leave 11 million litres of me a week behind on my way to Kitimat without getting into any serious trouble. And why should they? Eleven million litres of me would be more than three times funnier than Michigan, right?
That’s good news for me, because I’ve heard there are some mighty pretty places in northern BC and I think it would be a shame not to get to know them better.
And it’s good news for BC, because your premier’s promising lots of jobs out of oil and gas exports, and cleaning up after me will sure keep people employed.
Sorry if any of the spots I’m going to wreck is one of your favourites, but I’ve got to keep Alberta happy. You know what she’s like.
As posted at The
Common Sense Canadian
Miranda Holmes is a former journalist
who spent a decade working on toxics and genetic engineering for
Greenpeace and other environmental organizations in Canada and the
UK.
Thursday, July 26, 2012
Bureaucracy gone mad!
In case you missed it a couple in
Drummondville, Quebec have been told if
they do not remove or substantially reduce their front yard vegetable
garden they will face fines of up to $300 a day.
Drummondville town code states: that a
vegetable garden can take up 30 percent of a front yard at most. They
have given Landry and Beauchamp two weeks to comply. (After an
outpouring of support for their refusal to remove it, it is now
reported that this deadline may be extended.)
What is wrong with this picture, this
is not an overgrown patch of weeds but a very productive and well
cared for vegetable garden. Should we as a society not be encouraging
such initiatives, the days of manicured lawns that look nice but
produce nothing but more co2 from the lawnmower than they absorb
should be phased out in favor of productive use of the ever
decreasing green spaces in our cities. They are not the first folk to
run afoul of antiquated or less than flexible city bylaws, those for
whom wild flowers are preferable to grass have also run in to the
same kind of nonsense. Neither are they the first ones to be
personalized for growing vegetables, last
summer a woman in Michigan faced the same sort of thing but the city
was forced to back down after a public outcry.
Its time for city officials and other
urban residents who have their head in the sand that the food on
their plates does not magically appear in the grocery store and that
food shortages are becoming an increasing reality for many. Perhaps
this years drought conditions across North America and the ensuing
increase in prices will help bring the point home.
Want to support this couple, why not
start a veggi garden in your own urban front yard, just imagine a
street of houses fronted by gardens with tomatoes, sweet corn, peas,
beans, carrots, beets and so on.... what a beautiful sight that would
be.....
Friday, July 13, 2012
We get mail.....
Recently I have been getting an
increasing amount of Email, much of it due to getting on some 'media'
list directed at my efforts at Democracy
Under Fire which results in many political promotional material
from U.S. 'consultants'. Most is sent directly to the electronic
garbage bin however once in a while I get some interesting stuff.
I welcome the updates from Lead Now “a group of young Canadians taking action together for the fair, responsible and democratic Canada that we believe in.” Their latest projects are detailed below and I encourage those who are concerned with the direction that the Harper Regime is taking our democratic processes (and that SHOULD be all of you) to get involved.
- Pilot Campaigns to hold Conservative MPs accountable to their constituents
We’d like to try an experiment: local mass-mobilization campaigns in key ridings. We’ll encourage Conservative MPs, especially back-benchers who won with less than 50% of the vote, to become pro-democracy independents before the next election. If 13 of them joined together they could shift the balance of power in Parliament, and hold the Harper Conservatives accountable to a majority of Canadians. This is a powerful strategy, and we need to do it right.
Are you interested in committing your time to be part of a pilot campaign? Click here to sign up: Yes, I would like to volunteer as part of a local accountability campaign in my riding.
- Host a Leadnow Summer Gathering (July 24-August 10)
The Leadnow Summer Gatherings will connect pro-democracy Canadians in a casual setting to meet each other, make local connections, and talk about our long-term strategy. Together, we’ll take the next step in hosting a national conversation to create a long-term campaign for major improvements to our democracy, with a focus on electoral reform. Our goal is to build a game-changing strategy before the 2015 federal election to make our democracy work better for all Canadians.
Today, we’d just like to know if you’d be interested in hosting a Summer Gathering. Next week, we’ll send out an invitation for everyone in the Leadnow community to find and join the gathering closest to them.
You can decide whether your Summer Gathering is public or private, whether it will be a big group or just you and a few friends, and whether it will take place at a local coffee shop, in your living room, or as a backyard BBQ. Click here to learn more about hosting a Leadnow Summer Gathering: http://www.tfaforms.com/250842
- Build the Pro-Democracy Movement Online
Can’t join a Summer Gathering? No problem. Watch for another note from us in the next couple of weeks. We will ask for your feedback to help create the long-term democracy campaign focused on the 2015 election.
.......................................
The second piece of 'interesting mail
was from one of those 'consultants' promoting an
info-graphic detailing the resources used in raising animals for
food as opposed to the vegetarian diet. This was of interest to me
because I am a lifelong vegetarian, however not for reasons of animal
welfare, food resources or economics but simply for healthy eating. I
have nothing against those that get a portion of their protein from
animal sources however I do believe that, at least in North America,
that greater diversity of diet needs to be practiced, moderation and
a balanced diet is more important than what is part of that intake in
my view.
That said we should bear in mind, given
the increasing world population and finite food sources, that as
the info-graphic details it takes much more resources to provide
meat protein than direct intake of vegetable protein. Something to
think about!
........................................
The third bit of mail was from the
Edmonton Folk Music
Festival detailing their efforts to making their even 'green' and
have minimal impact upon the location and the environment as detailed
below.
Since the beginning, efforts to
minimize impact on the environment during the festival included:
·
Installing temporary plastic walkways to minimize damage to the park
·
Sending out cleaning crews throughout the day to pick up garbage: the
morning clean-up crew, called EnviroPower, is staffed by youth
volunteers and then the Site Environment crew monitors the park
during the day and evenings.
·
Recycling: the Festival Site Environment collects recyclable items to
minimize garbage sent to the landfill and composts organic waste
generated during the Festival.
·
Restoring Gallagher Park: this includes removing facilities and
equipment in a timely manner and restoring the grass.
Over the past few years, the green
movement has grown and other programs that have been instated are:
·
Bringing in 5,000 washable plates to onsite concessionaries and
implementing a ‘No Styrofoam’ policy on site.
·
Using Poly Lactic Acid (PLA) beer cups which derive entirely from
natural corn materials, is 100% renewable through annual corn
harvests and fully compostable. Installing solar panels on
merchandising tents which run lights and cash registers
·
The Festival and all concessionaries use bio-degradable cutlery,
napkins and other products which are composted
Congratulation to the organizers for
their efforts, these large outdoor events do have a considerable
impact upon the surroundings and any effort to minimize it is a good
thing. Well done folks.
........................................
Please note that this is NOT an invite
for every organization or 'public relations firm to send me a bunch
of crap in the hope that I will republish it on my blogs. I some how
have been added to a U.S. media list that has left me inundated with
mostly political 'Info Blasts' that I have little or no interest in.
No doubt that much of that is due to my 'Democracy
Under Fire' pages but some have bled over into the 'Rural
Canadian', I do like to keep up on CANADIAN political stuff and in
these days of kill the messenger it is NESSARY to keep up with
environmental and scientific concerns. In short if you are reading
this please use restraint in using my email links supplied for those
reader that are not comfortable (or internet savvy) enough to use the
comment section. Dialog is good ...... but too much crap from 'media
relation' types simply clogs the pipes!!
Thursday, July 5, 2012
Environmental Extremes
By now any one who is not totally brain
dead knows that climate change is a reality, how much of that is due
to human activity is open to debate but we most certainly have a
major part in in it. Given the extremes of weather and threats to our
rivers, forests, flora and fauna by both the changing conditions and
the threats from industrial activity one would think that governments
at all levels would all be pulling in the same direction to protect
our environment.
We all know of course that this is not
true, our Federal Government who should be leading the charge is in
fact opening up our natural world to further destruction by reducing
both the regulations and the staff that enforce them as well as our
scientific experts that study what, why and how these things are
happening and what to do about it.
On the other hand the Ontario
Provincial Government seems to be going to the opposite extreme.
Although they have all but suspended environmental assessments for
industrial wind farm installations in their rush to say that they are
supporting 'green' initiatives they are going overboard to protect
'wetlands' and other 'habitat'. It seems that now a farmers field that occasionally
floods and sees a flock of geese drop in for a rest could be
designated a protected wetland.
What follow then are extracts from a
couple of articles describing opposite extremes of government
actions, somewhere between these two their must be a reasonable level
of environmental protection whist still allowing controlled
development where necessary. Its a tough balancing act, I will let
you decide where that balance lays, for there will be no consensus on
this one, nor will we have any meaningful say in trying to find same.
Today all DFO (Department of Fisheries & Oceans - who are / were also responsible for fish habitat in rivers & streams) habitat protection and management staff in Canada are receiving letters that they are now "red-circled" - i.e. they are being affected by Bill C-38 with it's budget and habitat legislation and
program cuts (i.e. DFO downsizing) and many will soon not have a job. Staff were directed to not discuss this with anyone and only DFO Ottawa was allowed to comment on the issue. 132 habitat staff across Canada will be fired (laid off) in the next few months in that many will have to compete for remaining jobs. In the Pacific Region, they now have 92 staff and that is to be reduced to 60 - an approximate 33% cut in staff. Also, all habitat office locations in Pacific Region are to be closed down, with the exception of Whitehorse, Prince Rupert, Kamloops, Vancouver and Nanaimo.
Ottawa has given all DFO habitat staff
directions to remove the "Habitat Management Program" title
from their organization and from their offices, etc. in that they are
now to be called the "Fisheries Protection Program".
The scope is broader than anything Ontario has seen before. The draft rules would protect butterflies, toads, salamanders, deer, red spruce, white oak, alvars, sand dunes, bogs, owls, farm fields that flood in the spring, geese, springs, bears, lichens, gulls, turtles, sandpipers, mink, wolves, ospreys, and “dancing grounds” of the sharp-tailed grouse.
These include urban species such as ring-billed gulls (familiar wherever French fries are sold), merlins (a small hawk common in Ottawa) and “nuisance” geese.
More specifically, the following would be designated as Significant Wildlife Habitat:
• Any wetland with 20 or more frogs or tadpoles;
• Large buffer areas around nests of Cooper’s hawks, ring-billed gulls, Canada geese or most ducks, all of which are found in urban Ottawa;
• Farm fields that flood in spring if they are stopovers for 100 or more migrating geese or ducks;
• A single snapping turtle nest, or a pond where five painted turtles spend the winter;
• Any hawk or owl nest in a forest;
• A cliff and the “talus” (fallen rocks) at its base;
• Any stand of trees where 10 per cent or more of the trees are white oak;
• “Corridors” where toads, deer, or salamanders move from spot to spot;
• Any spring or “seep” where groundwater comes to the surface.
In all, the draft outlines habitats of hundreds of types of plants and animals, ranging from forests to beaches to farms and suburbs.
The draft document on Significant Wildlife Habitat was posted on a provincial website in the spring, but attracted little notice. It is on the Environmental Registry website, reference number 011-5740. The period for comments is closed.
---------------
And there you have it, the two extremes from two different levels
of government, and both of them IMHO as troubling as the other.Friday, June 29, 2012
TVO and CBC TV Broadcasts to End
It is reported that “CBC/Radio-Canada
is decommissioning its over-the-air analogue television transmission
network on July 31, 2012.” and it also seems that TVO
Ontario is decommissioning 14 medium and high-powered sites on July
31, the same day that over-the-air
broadcasts (OTA) cease for the CBC Television.
The only real surprise here is how
quietly this decision has taken place, it seems that the last day to
complain to the CRTC is June 18th but by all accounts it is a done deal
anyway so why bother. It is also no suprise that there is no
definitive list (from CBC) of the areas that will be left with NO broadcast TV
(those that are not within range of a digital signal) which is once
again the rural population whose only other option is expensive
satellite TV.
"This transmission infrastructure
is worth millions and has already been paid for by Canadian
taxpayers," says Catherine Edwards of the Canadian
Association of Community Television Users and Stations (CACTUS).
Rather than being scrapped, communities should be given the chance to
maintain it themselves. The transmitters and towers can be used not
just to continue free CBC service, but also to set up local wireless
Internet, mobile service, or community TV."
In March
2012, TVOntario announced that all
114 of its remaining analog transmitters still under TVOntario
ownership will be shut down by October 2013, and will not be
replaced by digital transmitters. Its 14 medium and high power
transmitters will be shut down July 31, 2012. Of its low power
transmitters, 50 will shut down in 2012 and the remaining 50 will
shut down in 2013. Remaining broadcasters that carry TVOntario
programming has since been transferred to local interests.[12]
- On
July 31, 2012 TVO will cease transmission at its 14 medium/high
power sites, and then we will begin to decommission those
sites. After July 31, 2012 over-the-air viewers in the
following communities can receive TVO by subscribing to a local
television service provider:
Bancroft | channel 42 |
Hawkesbury | channel 48 |
Huntsville | channel 13 |
Kenora | channel 44 |
Kingston | channel 38 |
North Bay | channel 6 |
Owen Sound | channel 12 |
Parry Sound | channel 42 |
Pembroke | channel 29 |
Penetanguishene | channel 51 |
Peterborough | channel 18 |
Sault Ste. Marie | channel 20 |
Sudbury | channel 19 |
Timmins | channel 7 |
On April 4, 2012, CBC released its budget plans, in which it announced that all of its approximately 620 analog television transmitters will be shut down on July 31, 2012, which is early than planned, due to funding reductions from the federal government.[56][57]
Once again us rural folks get screwed
and treated as a second class citizen because we are a minority. In
many of the locations, including it would seem the Grey Bruce area,
the broadcasts will not be replaced by digital signals but simply
shut down, period. As I said above that leaves but one choice for
many of us – satellite TV. If anyone thinks I am going to pay $50 a
month to watch an ever increasing load of crap they are sadly
mistaken. I will miss TVO though, particularly Steve Pakin's “The
Agenda”.
Also see my earlier posts on
this subject here, here
and
here
NOTE:- Although Industry Canada has
allocated a digital frequency for use by these stations there appears
to be no applications for actually providing a digital signal in
these largely rural areas. It is interesting to note that most
digital transmitters of TV stations are located in urban areas where
relatively inexpensive access to television via cable is available
whilst in more remote rural areas where cable is rarely available
there is now no access to a signal by either analog OR digital
signals!
Sunday, June 24, 2012
The Canada to come?
This from The
Sixth Estate needs no further introduction except to say that it
is much closer to reality than many realize. I replicate the article
in full here but highly recommend that you visit The Sixth Estate for
their many investigative and factual writings.
The following post is deliberately alarmist. Orwellian, you might say. I’m not trying to paint a picture of what things are like in Canada right now, or even what I think they’ll be like in the near future. I’m not an idiot. But I do want to paint a picture of the sort of Canada which is explicitly permitted under some of the legal changes proposed and/or actually passed by the Harper regime. Whether this represents in any way the policies of a party that used to stand for small, transparent, and accountable government, is also up to you. I think by the end of this you’ll have a good idea where I stand on that question. So some of this list has already happened, but more of it are things the government has said they want to be allowed to happen, but haven’t actually done. Yet.
We’ll start from the perspective of an immigrant, rather than a newborn Canadian. You apply for immigration, you make sure all your ducks are in order, and you wait for your application to be processed. Because the government can’t afford to process the paperwork, your application may languish for a considerable time. Sometimes, the government simply eliminates the waiting list altogether and instructs you to start over from square one. You will also need to keep your political beliefs very quiet (or make sure they agree with the government in power), because the law allows the minister to personally reject your application for the nebulous reason of “public policy considerations.”
Assuming you arrive by air, from the moment you step off the airplane, you’ll be subjected — like all Canadians — to constant surveillance by the national security service, which routinely records all conversations at major airports. Also like all Canadians, your email, Internet use, and cell phone may be monitored at any time by the security service or the police, secretly and without a warrant. But as an immigrant, you’re also subject to some more intensive surveillance activities too. For instance, if the security service visits and demands that you report for an interrogation, you must agree. At this interrogation they can ask any questions they wish, and if you fail to answer truthfully, that’s grounds for expulsion from the country.
There’s another good reason to keep your political beliefs quiet, too: even after you become a citizen, if for some reason you’ve drawn the ire of the government (or the government’s American ally), once you leave the country the government claims the power not to let you back in. This isn’t a power granted to the government by the Constitution; in fact, it’s a power specifically denied by the Constitution. However, the government’s official policy is that when a minister makes a decision on a “matter of high policy,” ministerial prerogative automatically trumps the Constitution, so in practice, the Constitution doesn’t apply to government policy in those areas.
It’s no surprise that the government routinely violates its own and international law: that’s part of how the Canadian state functions. The ruling party and its Cabinet ministers have been under investigation for various incidents of fraud and corruption for six of the past seven years, racking up multiple convictions and findings of guilt. None of these convictions have amounted to more than mild admonitions, however, so all of the people in question, including the minister responsible for the police, are still at their posts. Recently an opposition party levelled yet another allegation of petty corruption; in retaliation, they were hauled into court to give an accounting for themselves.
You find a job in a federally regulated sector — at an airline company, say, or on the railway. In federal sectors, there are large trade unions, but strikes are outlawed. Even in the private sector, the federal government appoints arbitrators to determine your wages and working conditions, rather than allow these decisions to be made free of government interference in the labour market. So you pay dues to the union, you work for a private employer, but your wages are set by the government, sometimes in collaboration with the employer, sometimes not.
For some reason the government requires that a broadcast of Parliament be included in all cable packages, so you tune in a few times before rapidly growing bored of the inanity of it all. Under the Harper regime, Parliamentary debate does occur from time to time, but it’s strictly optional. The Speaker has ruled that, if the government really wants to, it can introduce all of the legislation for the session in a single omnibus bill, hold a paltry five hours of debate on that bill before passing it, and then close up shop early and come back in a year for the next session. The Speaker has also ruled that although opposition MPs have the right to ask questions of the government in Parliament, the government does not have an obligation to actually answer them.
That’s not out of the ordinary, either. Parliament has an array of theoretically independent commissioners, but their powers are minimal. One of them has actually threatened legal action to force the government to supply him financial information they’re legally required to provide; in response, the government has hinted that his job will be next on the chopping block. Another commissioner has repeatedly pointed to the illegal lobbying activities of several of the Prime Minister’s senior advisors; but in no case has this resulted in a charge being laid. The government and its advisors, it seems, are above and beyond the reach of mere law. You also have legal options open to you to request government information as a private citizen, but those options are very limited. The government routinely engages in illegal obstruction of access-to-information requests, ranging from excessive delays to retroactive reclassification of documents under a system known — at least in some departments — as the “Purple File.”
Of course the Charter guarantees you the right to protest all of this. But you’ll want to be careful with that. The government still provides subsidies to a range of NGOs and quasi-NGOs (what the British call quangos), but increasingly those subsidies come with explicit strings attached. Until last year, the only obvious one involved Canada’s foreign allies: criticize their domestic policy, warned the immigration minister, and your funding will get pulled. Since 2011, the list of enemies has broadened. The new policy, one minister revealed following the shutdown of the country’s premier environmental policy council, is that advocating a policy position which the government disagrees with is grounds to have your funding pulled. The prime minister subsequently clarified that organizations whose positions were “contrary to government policy” would be defunded and/or “eliminated” where possible. Recently a union economist was hauled before a Parliamentary committee and given a grotesquely comical McCarthyist grilling on his links to opposition political parties.
The funding issues are only the soft and slushy tip of the iceberg, however. The security service routinely infiltrates and monitors political advocacy groups, especially ones with ties to environmentalist or to First Nations. Raise too much of a stink, and you’ll be labelled an “enemy of the state.” Calling a minister’s office to complain about a new piece of legislation could be enough to get you cited for contempt of Parliament. If you do it anonymously, or issue threats, the government will ask the police and the intelligence service to investigate. But even if you just call to register a complaint, you can still be charged with the rather nebulous offence of interfering with a government official in the course of his duties. And if you’re an immigrant, these sorts of political activities probably raise the risk of you getting summoned to one of those pesky CSIS interviews.
Plus, if you’ve decided to identify yourself in a protest to your politician or a Cabinet minister, you’ll also be entered into another database, a separate one maintained by the ruling party with the objective of maintaining an up-to-date record of the address, political beliefs, and public activities of every citizen in the country. Government officials privately acknowledge that during the last election someone — a party insider or an outside hacker, they don’t know — accessed this database and downloaded contact information for thousands of suspected political dissidents, who were then misdirected to bogus polling stations in a bizarre attempt to prevent them from casting their votes. More recently, unknown but clearly well-organized hackers came within a hair’s breadth of shutting down an opposition party’s leadership convention. No one claimed responsibility; in fact, no one seems remotely concerned with identifying the guilty party.
And meanwhile, the government is trying very hard to explain to Canadians that the increasing gaps between their ideological vision of utopia and the reality of Canadian dystopia are the fault of a widespread liberal conspiracy which has penetrated deep into the government bureaucracy with the intention of undermining the government. For instance, recently, the government announced that lengthy delays in processing Employment Insurance paperwork were not the fault of government cutbacks (which actually improved service levels), but rather the fault of an organized conspiracy among the EI administrators to engage in work slowdowns and anti-government wrecking. For years, the ruling party has alleged that Liberals are secreted away at every level of the CBC and are trying to use the state broadcaster to undermine the government. Conservative commentators also allege that liberals have squirreled themselves away in Elections Canada and are trying to use that organization for much the same purpose.
A particularly telling sign of the paranoid authoritarian streak behind these tactics is that in recent months actual and former Conservatives and Conservative government appointees have become seen as sufficiently disloyal that they are denounced as members of the liberal conspiracy. Conservative appointees Marc Mayrand (head of Elections Canada), Tom Lederer (the Toronto judge who threw out Ted Opitz’s election), and Parliamentary Budget Officer Kevin Page, to name just three recent examples, have all been denounced as having been scheming liberal dissidents all along after falling afoul of the government. Recently two card-carrying Conservative veterans complained that a government MP on a Parliamentary committee had fallen asleep while listening to their presentation; for this seemingly minor faux pas, they were promptly denounced as pro-Russian NDP agents trying — once again — to embarrass the government.
Hoping that another exercise in dividing an conquering will shore up their flagging support, the government is returning to and escalating this war on the bureaucracy with new gusto. The day I sat down to pen this piece, a secret report was mysteriously leaked to the state broadcaster, and then announced on the evening news with great fanfare, purporting to show that bureaucrats were booking excessive sick time. It’s not hard to imagine who “leaked” this. To cut down on unwanted leaks and criticism, all employees in the federal public sector are being issued variations on a general order that they have ”a duty to refrain from public criticism of the government,” not just from within the workplace but also as a private citizen. Parks Canada’s version can be found here. A vaguer version of the duty of loyalty is also applied, as of May 2012, to English- but not French-language employees of the state broadcaster.
In addition to tightening the flow of information in this way, the government is also increasingly resorting to the more subtle tactic of simply deleting information entirely. Councils that have tried to change government policy on contentious issues, like the National Roundtable on the Environment, aren’t the only research-related programs being scrapped this year. The government’s ongoing war of attrition against Statistics Canada is continuing as well, with one of the most recent incidents being the mysterious disappearance of the agency’s online data tables on Employment Insurance rates just as the debate over EI reform was picking up speed. If you don’t know what’s going on, you can’t criticize what’s going on.
In short, the Harper regime has banned strikes, implemented massive new surveillance programs (extending to personal computers and cell phones as well as normal passenger traffic in public spaces), gutted the customary rights of Parliament, committed numerous incidents of electoral fraud, censored the public service, suppressed and classified formerly public information, denounced critics as members of a partian conspiracy, and argued that routine ministerial decisions take precedence over not just the law but even the Constitution. Thank God the Conservative Party stands for small and transparent government, or I’d be starting to get a little worried just about now.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)