Joe Biden - Plan for Iraq

Joe Biden - Plan for Iraq

...at least 250,000 Iraqis to flee their homes in recent months. At the same time, Al Qaeda is now so firmly entrenched in Western Iraq that it has morphed into an indigenous jihadist threat. As a result, Iraq risks becoming what it was not before the war: a haven for radical fundamentalists.

There is no purely military solution to the sectarian civil war. The only way to break the vicious cycle of violence - and to create the conditions for our armed forces to responsibly withdraw -- is to give Shiites, Sunnis and Kurds incentives to pursue their interests peacefully. That requires an equitable and viable power sharing arrangement. That's where my plan comes in. This plan is not partition - in fact, it may be the only way to prevent violent partition and preserve a unified Iraq. This plan is consistent with Iraq's constitution, which provides for Iraq's 18 provinces to join together in regions, with their own security forces, and control over most day-to-day issues. This plan is the only idea on the table for dealing with the militia, which are likely to retreat to their respective regions. This plan is consistent with a strong central government, with clearly defined responsibilities. Indeed, it provides an agenda for that government, whose mere existence will not end sectarian violence.

The example of Bosnia is illustrative. Ten years ago, Bosnia was being torn apart by ethnic cleansing. The United States stepped in decisively with the Dayton Accords to keep the country whole by, paradoxically, dividing it into ethnic federations. We even allowed Muslims, Croats and Serbs to retain separate armies. With the help of U.S. troops and others, Bosnians have lived a decade in peace. Now, they are strengthening their central government, and disbanding their separate armies.

The course we're on leads to a terrible civil war and possibly a regional war. Joe Biden's plan is designed to head that off. He believe it is the best way to bring our troops home, protect our fundamental security interests, and preserve Iraq as a unified country.The question for those who reject this plan is simple: what is your alternative?

A Five Point Plan for Iraq

1. Establish One Iraq, with Three Regions * Federalize Iraq in accordance with its constitution by establishing three largely autonomous regions - Shiite, Sunni and Kurd -- with a strong but limited central government in Baghdad * Put the central government in charge of truly common interests: border defense, foreign policy, oil production and revenues * Form regional governments -- Kurd, Sunni and Shiite -- responsible for administering their own regions

2. Share Oil Revenues * Gain agreement for the federal solution from the Sunni Arabs by guaranteeing them 20 percent of all present and future oil revenues -- an amount roughly proportional to their size -- which would make their region economically viable * Empower the central government to set national oil policy and distribute the revenues, which would attract needed foreign investment and reinforce each community's interest in keeping Iraq intact and protecting the oil infrastructure

3. Convene International Conference, Enforce Regional Non-Aggression Pact * Convene with the U.N. a regional security conference where Iraq's neighbors, including Iran, pledge to support Iraq's power sharing agreement and respect Iraq's borders * Engage Iraq's neighbors directly to overcome their suspicions and focus their efforts on stabilizing Iraq, not undermining it
* Create a standing Contact Group, to include the major powers, that would engage Iraq's neighbors and enforce their commitments

4. Responsibly Drawdown US Troops* Direct U.S. military commanders to develop a plan to withdraw and re-deploy almost all U.S. forces from Iraq by the end of 2007* Maintain in or near Iraq a small residual force -- perhaps 20,000 troops -- to strike any concentration of terrorists, help keep Iraq's neighbors honest and train its security forces

5. Increase Reconstruction Assistance and Create a Jobs Program * Provide more reconstruction assistance, conditioned on the protection of minority and women's rights and the establishment of a jobs program to give Iraqi youth an alternative to the militia and criminal gangs * Insist that other countries take the lead in funding reconstruction by making good on old commitments and providing new ones -- especially the oil-rich Arab Gulf countries

Plan for Iraq: What It Is - and What It Is Not

Some commentators have either misunderstood the Plan, or mischaracterized it. Here is what the plan is - and what it is not:

1. The Plan is not partition.In fact, it may be the only way to prevent a violent partition - which has already started -- and preserve a unified Iraq. We call for a strong central government, with clearly defined responsibilities for truly common interests like foreign policy and the distribution of oil revenues. Indeed, the Plan provides an agenda for that government, whose mere existence will not end sectarian violence.

2. The Plan is not a foreign imposition.To the contrary, it is consistent with Iraq's constitution, which already provides for Iraq's 18 provinces to join together in regions, with their own security forces, and control over most day-to-day issues. On October 11, Iraq's parliament approved legislation to implement the constitution's articles on federalism. Prior to the British colonial period and Saddam's military dictatorship, what is now Iraq functioned as three largely autonomous regions.But federalism alone is not enough. To ensure Sunni support, it is imperative that Iraqis also agree to an oil revenue sharing formula that guarantees the Sunni region economic viability. The United States should strongly promote such an agreement. The final decisions will be up to Iraqis, but if we do not help them arrange the necessary compromises, nothing will get done. At key junctures in the past, we have used our influence to shape political outcomes in Iraq, notably by convincing the Shiites and Kurds to accept a provision allowing for the constitution to be amended following its adoption, which was necessary to secure Sunni participation in the referendum. Using our influence is not the same as imposing our will. With 140,000 Americans at risk, we have a right and an obligation to make known our views.

3. The Plan is not an invitation to sectarian cleansing.Tragically, that invitation has been sent, received and acted upon. Since the Samarra mosque bombing in February, one quarter of a million Iraqis have fled their homes for fear of sectarian violence, at a rate now approaching 10,000 people a week. That does not include hundreds of thousands of Iraqis - many from the professional class - who have left Iraq since the war. Only a political settlement, as proposed in the Plan, has a chance to stop this downward spiral.

4. The Plan is the only idea on the table for dealing with the sectarian militia.It offers a realistic albeit interim solution. Realistic, because none of the major groups will give up their militia voluntarily in the absence of trust and confidence and neither we or the Iraqi government has the means to force them to do so. Once federalism is implemented, the militias are likely to retreat to their respective regions to protect their own and vie for power, instead of killing the members of other groups. But it is only an interim solution, because no nation can sustain itself peacefully with private armies. Over time, if a political settlement endures, the militia would be incorporated into regional and national forces, as is happening in Bosnia.

5. The Plan is an answer to the problem of mixed cities.Large cities with mixed populations present a challenge under any plan now being considered. The essence of the Plan is that mixed populations can only live together peacefully if their leadership is truly satisfied with the overall arrangement. If so, that leadership will help keep the peace in the cities. At the same time, we would make Baghdad a federal city, and buttress the protection of minorities there and in the other mixed cities with an international peacekeeping force. Right now, the prospect for raising such a force is small. But following a political settlement, an international conference and the establishment of a Contact Group, others are more likely to participate, including countries like Saudi Arabia which have offered peacekeepers in the past.

6. The Plan is in the self-interest of Iran.Iran likes it exactly as it is in Iraq - with the United States bogged down and bleeding. But the prospect of a civil war in Iraq is not in Tehran's interest: it could easily spill over Iraq's borders and turn into a regional war with neighbors intervening on opposing sides and exacerbating the Sunni-Shiite divide at a time Shiite Iran is trying to exert leadership in the Islamic world. Iran also would receive large refugee flows as Iraqis flee the fighting. Iran, like all of Iraq's neighbors, has an interest in Iraq remaining unified and not splitting into independent states. Iran does not want to see an independent Kurdistan emerge and serve as an example for its own restive 5 million Kurds. That's why Iran - and all of Iraq's neighbors -- can and should be engaged to support a political settlement in Iraq.

7. The Plan is in the self-interest of Sunnis, Shiites and Kurds.The Sunnis increasingly understand they will not regain power in Iraq. Faced with the choice of being a permanent minority player in a central government dominated by Shiites or having the freedom to control their day-to-day lives in a Sunni region, they are likely to choose the latter provided they are guaranteed a fair share of oil revenues to make their region viable. The Shiites know they can dominate Iraq politically, but not defeat a Sunni insurgency, which can bleed Iraq for years. The Kurds may dream of independence, but fear the reaction of Turkey and Iran - their interest is to achieve as much autonomy as possible while keeping Iraq together. Why would Shiites and Kurds give up some oil revenues to the Sunnis? Because that is the price of peace and the only way to attract the massive foreign investment needed to maximize Iraqi oil production. The result will be to give Shiites and Kurds a smaller piece of a much larger oil pie and give all three groups an incentive to protect the oil infrastructure.

One Signature Could End this War

Friend,

A piece of paper will soon be placed on George Bush's desk in the Oval Office.

By picking up a pen and signing his name to it, he could end the war in Iraq.

The House and Senate united and passed a bill that would provide for our troops now and begin a redeployment from Iraq to bring them home.

We're just one signature away from ending the tragic mistake that has cut short thousands of American lives, cost tens of billions of dollars, and destroyed America's global moral leadership. But only if the president signs the bill.

I opposed this war from the beginning, and I would sign the bill to end it in a heartbeat.

If you would too, please take a moment to tell someone just how simple it would be to end this war:

http://www.barackobama.com/onesignature

All of the politics, all of the spin, all of the rhetoric means very little today.

The overwhelming majority of Americans want this war to end. The president must follow them.

America is one signature away.

Barack Obama

Cabon Credit Market in Canada?

Canada's First Carbon Tax

Is Alberta's new premier toeing Ottawa's eco-line, or ensuring the feds will have to follow his?

Matthew Stuart - April 9, 2007

They were all looking East. For Albertans, surely any attack on the vital energy industry in the name of environmentalism would be spawned in Ottawa, the birthplace of the reviled National Energy Program of the eighties. As it turns out, they should have cast their wary gaze on their own backyard. On March 8, Alberta Premier

Ed Stelmach made the previously unthinkable announcement of Alberta becoming the first province in Canada to introduce a carbon tax.

The new Climate Change and Emissions Management Amendment Act targets companies that emit more than 100,000 tonnes of greenhouse gases annually. It demands they reduce the intensity of their emissions, or gases emitted per unit of production, by 12 per cent beginning

July 1, or start paying. For every tonne over the reduction target, the hundred or so companies must either invest $15 in a government-controlled technology fund, or they can buy "offsets" from another company that has reduced their emissions, echoing the by-your-way-out approach of the Kyoto Protocol.

The program was announced after Prime Minister Stephen Harper tossed $155.9 million into the pot from the feds' "EcoTrust" to "protect Canadians from the consequences of climate change, air pollution and greenhouse gas emissions," and to recognize "Alberta's ambitious plans." But the feds' cash injection pales next to the $586.2 million paid to Ontario on March 6 to phase out coal-fired electricity generators, or the $962 million going to Toronto alone to expand its public transit system--making sure people in the Big Smoke get to work on time. Alberta, which is supposed to be responsible for up to 40 per cent of the country's greenhouse gases, even received less than the $200 million given to B.C. for the construction of a "hydrogen highway" that will have recharge stations for people driving cars with fuel cells--even though such a thing is not yet on the market.

Perhaps Ottawa's relative stinginess towards Alberta is due to the projected revenues from the province's new tax, pegged at $175 million for the first six months alone--$20 million more than the federal grant. Alberta Environment Minister Rob Renner wasn't particularly diplomatic when talking about the projected tax haul, admitting that the province's plan is to have most emitters unable to reach their targets and therefore have to pony up the cash. "The fact is, the vast majority of [emitters] are going to have to make contributions to the technology fund. That is the approach that we are relying upon," Renner said following the announcement.

As for Stelmach, his take on the carbon tax was vague, and reminiscent of his campaign for leader of the Progressive Conservative party and the throne speech that critics say echoed hollow. "This government is committed to tackling climate change and this is just one of many ways we are responding," Stelmach said, leaving one to wonder how many more blows Alberta should brace for.

Stelmach and Renner's plan came out before the federal Tories were to announce their national emissions regulations, which Harper cryptically says will be coming soon. If it doesn't mirror Alberta's plan, says Pierre Alvarez, president of the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers, it could turn into an administrative nightmare, because Alberta's plan is already complicated enough.

"There is a lot of technical work to be done here. . . . How do offsets work, what's a qualifying offset, how are you going to measure, how are you going to report? Other than the Constitution, this is the most complicated public policy file I've ever worked on," he says.

Paul Hinman, deputy leader and lone MLA for the Alberta Alliance party, says he doubts Stelmach's government is up for a fight with Ottawa if yet another set of environmental standards is brought in that will further damage Alberta industry.

"I think the mentality, the behaviour and the thought of the [Alberta] Tory government has not really changed. Premier Stelmach was minister of intergovernmental affairs and he did nothing in that position to stop attacks on Alberta," he says.

Hinman says he has received numerous offers to cross the floor and join the Tories, but he doesn't want to be part of Stelmach's government. "We need a government that understands and protects the interests of Alberta, and not one that runs on what they think is politically wise."

Indeed, Hinman points to a complete turnaround by Finance Minister Lyle Oberg when he backed down from a confrontation with Ottawa, announcing suddenly on March 12 that the PCs won't bother defending the province's resource revenue from the federal equalization payment formula. Oberg stated nonchalantly that the government recognizes "there's certainly a high chance that this is going to come in, whether we say anything or not." Hardly the tough talk Albertans and the rest of the country have become accustomed to from a normally protectionist provincial government. Particularly puzzling is that both Stelmach and Ted Morton, now minister of sustainable resource development, campaigned for the PC leadership partly on protecting resource revenue from the equalization equation.

Oberg added that it didn't make sense to oppose the plan when the feds had promised to make it up to them with a per capita payment. But Hinman says that move equals a sellout.

"That's absolutely fundamentally wrong," Hinman says. "That's like giving up the ownership of your car and saying you get to still have the keys. In the areas where it's our jurisdiction, we need to wake up and say we'll look after ourselves." Instead, he says, they have given up the fight.

Oberg later awkwardly backed away from his statements, raising questions about rifts in cabinet.

The carbon tax, while a financial burden for the petroleum industry, isn't enough to put it in any danger--at least right now, says Alvarez. He points out, though, that petroleum commodity prices have been declining recently, and the further down they go, the harder the blow of Stelmach's tax. And the provincial government is reviewing Alberta's oil and gas royalty scheme, with a report due on Aug. 31 that will determine whether or not companies will have to pass more of their profits on to the government. Put it all together and Alvarez says it's looking like "a perfect storm."

"This is a commodity business and prices go up and down; that cannot be ignored. More importantly, it's not just the climate change costs from the Alberta plan. You've got an Alberta plan, a federal plan, an Alberta royalty review and a federal budget coming. If each one of those goes in a negative way, there could be very significant negative consequences to the investment climate, there is no doubt about it. You add up the cumulative effect and it could be very serious," he says.

While Alvarez is reluctant to refer to Alberta's new plan as a carbon tax, Ross McKitrick, an environmental economics professor at the University of Guelph, says it fits the bill, adding that paying the tax to a government technology fund is a waste of money.

"I think it's a terrible idea to put the money into a dedicated fund. The money is going to accumulate in the fund and then they're going to want to start paying it out even if they don't have any worthwhile projects to put it into. They'll start to decide whether projects get funded or not based on the accident of how many firms paid into it and how much, rather than the intrinsic merits of the project," McKitrick says, adding that most companies will opt for paying into the fund instead of going through the process of getting a Kyoto-style offset investment approved.

But McKitrick offers another take on the strategy of the new act. "In the case of air pollution, it has typically been that the first level of government to regulate is the one that gets jurisdiction," he says. "So what may be going on here is they don't like what the federal government is planning, so they're going to enact legislation on a provincial level, and then if the federal government comes up with something more stringent, they can take it to court and say it is their jurisdiction. Once they've established their own legislation, the only way the federal government could override it is under the peace, order and good government clause in the Constitution. The federal government would then have to prove in court that it's necessary for peace, order and good government that the federal government regulates this area. Otherwise, they would have to back out."

In actuality, in Section 8 of the previous Alberta Climate Change and Emissions Management Act, Bill 37, which received royal assent on Dec. 4, 2003, there is a provision that forbids the Alberta minister of environment from entering any agreements with the federal government that contradicts emissions targets set out by the province. But Prime Minister Harper has declared that federal emission regulations, expected sometime in March, will apply to industry across Canada without exception. Industry and critics will now have to wait to see if Stelmach is being pushed back, or just digging in.

*************

Alberta cool to joining B.C. in trading emissions credits By JIM MACDONALD

EDMONTON (CP) - Alberta and British Columbia may have locked arms on trade and labour mobility agreements, but Alberta Premier Ed Stelmach is rejecting B.C.'s invitation to join a regional market for trading carbon credits.

Stelmach says he wants Alberta money to stay in Alberta rather than flowing between provinces and western U.S. states looking to offset their greenhouse gas emissions.

"We've taken a very firm position with premiers right across Canada that our dollars are going to go into infrastructure technology in Alberta," Stelmach said Friday outside a joint cabinet meeting.

"There's opportunity to trade credits here in Alberta between industry."

But B.C. Premier Gordon Campbell remains hopeful about selling Alberta on the benefits of a regional trading system, which would also involve Arizona, Washington, Oregon, New Mexico and California.

"I think it actually works for all of us and I think the larger the market, the better off we are," Campbell said as he entered the meeting.

"Right now we're talking about the potential marketplace of over 200 million people and we think there'll be other states that will join, and potentially other provinces."

Stelmach says he's more inclined to consider allowing industries within Alberta to trade credits, but he's willing to listen to B.C.'s proposal.

The Alberta premier hinted there's a possibility the province may be willing to participate in some kind of co-operation on industrial emissions.

Campbell said B.C.'s goal is to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 33 per cent by 2020.

"I'd love to keep B.C.'s money in B.C. too, but I think that the real issue for us is how do we accomplish our goals?" he said.

"We think that there are some real potential offsets and real potential economic benefits that we can offer to that marketplace and that's what we're going to try and accomplish."

Campbell says B.C. is also counting on Alberta to help promote the 2010 Winter Olympics in Vancouver by sharing insight into the success of the 1988 Winter Olympics in Calgary.

"I think there are real opportunities for Alberta, as there are for the rest of the country, but Alberta understands the potential of the Olympics."

Combining tourism packages that would include the Olympics with travel to Alberta would be one opportunity, said Campbell.

Friday's meeting was the fifth joint cabinet session between the two provinces. Last year, Alberta and B.C. signed a trade and labour mobility agreement, which will be phased in over the next two years.

The deal streamlines regulations for companies doing business in both provinces and allows workers to migrate more easily between Alberta and B.C.

Although strongly opposed by some labour groups and the NDP governments in Manitoba and Saskatchewan, the agreement is the first deal of its kind in Canada.

Ontario and the Atlantic provinces have also expressed interest.

Four agreements were to be signed at Friday's meeting. One was a deal to share workers and equipment during emergencies, such as forest fires. Another was to allow cancer patients to travel between provinces to receive radiation treatments.

Two other memorandums of understanding involve sharing expertise on public-private building partnerships and pooling resources when purchasing drugs and other medical supplies.

France and World at Crossroads

France and World at Crossroads:

At 85% turnout, the French Presidential election was a huge success now setting up a clash of two visions for the run off between Socialist Ségolène Royal and Conservative Nicolas Sarkozy. Royal has captured the left wing vote from smaller parties such as the Communists, while Sarkozy was able to dig into the vote for extremist candidate Jean-Marie Le Pen who faced off against Chirac in the last presidential election runoff. Sarkozy wants to "Americanize" the French economy, control spending and improve ties with Washington. Royal does not want to cut social programs and has been vague on economic and competitiveness issues. She has also made several foreign policy blunders including her recent visit to Quebec where she appeared to endorse an independent Quebec. If Ségolène Royal wins, she would become France's first female President. She is part of a growing list of strong female politicians including Angela Merkel, Hillary Clinton and Tzipi Livni who all have a chance at taking power of their nations. Polling has Royal and Sarkozy at 50-50 and I expect turnout again will be extremely high. Like every other nation in the world, France is at a crossroads and is in desperate need for a new vision and ideas to move forward in today's world. France is choosing a leader based on ideas and national direction, the result of this will be increased engagement and emotion.

Globalization, new technology and a shift in demographics is changing the world. Threats such as climate change/pollution, nuclear weapons, violent conflicts, terrorism, oil and water shortages, natural disasters, and poverty are very real. In a competitive global economy, each nation is trying to find a way to balance the economy and the environment without decreasing our standards of living. Domestically, governments are often trying to balance reducing taxes while providing services such as schools, hospitals, police, military, transportation infrastructure and waste management. Tough decisions are constantly made and many of them affect us at the individual level. Few of us even bother to pay attention.

The average middle class family in England, France, the United States, Canada and many other nations in the world are finding they are just not getting ahead. People are worried about their retirement savings, the value of their homes, their interest rates on mortgages and loans, their increasing energy, property tax and other bills, insurance, increasing gas prices at the pump, ATM fees and credit card balances. Students are suffering from massive student debts and finding the right job that fulfills them and earns them enough to pay back the bank. In York Region and the GTA we find ourselves trapped in gridlock for hours each day. Childcare, fitness, and meals also cost money and the average family is finding less disposable income to stimulate the economy through the purchase of goods and services. The middle class is also working harder and finding less time for sleep, relaxation and family. We are over taxed, yet are services seem to constantly be on decline. Some find themselves living from one pay day to the next. Many others find themselves living pay day to credit card to pay day. Individually we all have very little time to follow politics closely and usually it is no where near the top of people's priority lists. Personal situations such as issues at work, relationships with family and friends, unexpected expenses, driving the kids to hockey and trying to stay healthy take up all of our time. Issues like Autism, cancer, AIDS, victims of crime and disability affect many real people. For those living below the poverty line, it is a matter of survival each day. The gap between this group and the top income earners continues to grow. Outsourcing of jobs and the competitive global economy are forcing those in Western countries to continue to make sacrifices to maintain the status quo. Incidents like Enron and Conrad Black are becoming more and more common in the media. At the same time development is taking away our green space, pollution is affecting our air and water quality, chemicals and toxins are getting into our bodies, smog days are increasing Asthma cases and are more and more children are facing obesity due to lifestyle choices. People are well aware of the problems they face and are desperate for new ideas, vision finding practical solutions from our politicians. They want to see less tricks to get votes and more action on the top issues that matter to the average Joe and Jane. The problem is partisan games, corruption and lack of action on issues of constituent concern have resulted in a loss of confidence in politicians of all stripes in most parts of the world.

Elections are soon going to be taking place in Canada, United States, England, Italy, Russia, Israel, Turkey and Australia. In a few short years there will be a clean slate of leaders tackling the world's problems. The era of Chirac, Blair and Bush is almost over, and each country must now struggle to find their identities and best interests in the changing world stage. The population in France lived up to their duty and cast a vote despite the fact that 40% admitted to being undecided right up to election day. Hopefully this increase in voter turnout will become a trend in any election where a free people have the right and privilege to vote. Decisions made by the people we send to government have an impact at our very own kitchen tables.

Thanks for reading...

Darryl

Russians dream of tunnel to Alaska

Tunnel dream: Undersea project would link Alaska, Russia

POSTED: 4:24 a.m. EDT, April 25, 2007

Story Highlights

• $65 billion project would go under Bering Strait
• Proposed tunnel would be 68 miles long, in waters up to 180 feet deep
• Chunnel, linking Britain and France is only 30 miles long
• Project would take 20 years to build

Adjust font size:

MOSCOW, Russia (AP) -- For more than a century, entrepreneurs and engineers have dreamed of building a tunnel connecting the eastern and western hemispheres under the Bering Strait -- only to be brought up short by war, revolution and politics.

Now die-hard supporters are renewing their push for the audacious plan -- a $65 billion highway project that would link two of the world's most inhospitable regions by burrowing under a stretch of water connecting the Pacific with the Arctic Ocean.

Russians and Americans alike made their pitch for the project at a conference titled "Megaprojects of Russia's East," held Tuesday in Moscow.

"It's time to the rewrite the old slogan 'Workers of the world unite!"' said Walter Hickel, a former Alaska governor and interior secretary under President Richard Nixon. "It's time to proclaim, 'Workers -- Unite the world!"'

A Russian Economics Ministry official tossed cold water on the idea, saying he wanted to know who planned to pay the mammoth bill for the project before seriously discussing it. But Hickel was unfazed in his speech, saying the route would unlock hitherto untapped natural resources -- and bolster the economies of both Alaska and Russia's Far East.

The proposed 68-mile tunnel would be the longest in the world. It would also be the linchpin for a 3,700-mile railroad line stretching from Yakutsk -- the capital of a gold- and mineral-rich Siberian region roughly the size of India -- through extreme northeastern Russia, in waters up to 180 feet deep and into the western coast of Alaska. Winter temperatures there routinely hit minus 94 F. (Map)

By comparison, the undersea tunnel that is now the world's longest -- the Chunnel, linking Britain and France -- is only 30 miles long.

That raises the prospect of some tantalizingly exotic routes -- train riders could catch the London-Moscow-Washington express, conference organizers suggested.

Lobbyists claimed the project is guaranteed to turn a profit after 30 years. As crews construct the road and rail link, they said, the workers would also build oil and gas pipelines and lay electricity and fiber-optic cables. Trains would whisk cargos at up to 60 mph 260 feet beneath the seabed.

Eventually, 3 percent of the world's cargo could move along the route, organizers hope.

Private investment called for

Maxim Bystrov, deputy head of the federal agency for managing Special Economic Zones, injected a note of sobriety to the heady talk of linking East and West by road and rail. He said his ministry would invest in the project only when private investors said they were committed to building it.

"As a ministry employee I am used to working with figures and used to working with projects that have an economic and financial base," Bystrov said. "The word 'prozhekt' has a negative meaning in Russian. I want this 'prozhekt' to turn into a 'project."'

The idea has a long history. Russia's last czar, Nicholas II, twice approved the implementation of a similar plan, perhaps eying the gold- and oil-rich territory that the Russian Imperial government had sold to the United States just before the turn of the 20th century.

The First World War and the Bolshevik Revolution doomed both attempts.

Despite the allure, there were signs Tuesday that there is no light at the end of this particular tunnel. A top economic adviser to President Vladimir Putin, as well as the Russian railway minister, who had been billed to speak, pulled out at the last minute.

$120 million in study costs alone

The feasibility study alone would cost $120 million and would take two years to complete, organizers said. Actual construction of the road-rail-pipeline-cable effort could take up to 20 years.

Still, Vladimir Brezhnev, president of Russian construction conglomerate Transstroi, said that the technology to tackle the construction work existed.

"Perhaps not all of us will be involved in this," he told conference participants. "But as an engineer I wish I could be."

A statement adopted at the conference Tuesday called on the governments of Russia, the United States, Japan, China and the European Union to endorse the tunnel as part of their economic development strategies. It urged government officials to raise the issue at the G-8 summit in Germany in June.

George Koumal, president of the Interhemispheric Bering Strait Tunnel and Railroad Group -- the noncommercial organization pushing for the project -- said that while many have seen England from France and vice versa across the Channel, there is little communication between the people living on either side of the Bering Strait.

"There are very few people who have stood on the beach in Alaska," he said. "Seemingly you can stretch out your hand and touch Mother Russia."

*****************

Russia's tunnel vision

Jon Harding and claudia Cattaneo, Financial Post

Published: Thursday, April 19, 2007

CALGARY - Russia yesterday revived a plan to transport oil, natural gas and electricity to the United States via a tunnel under the Bering Strait from Siberia to Alaska, a colossal project that was quickly panned for its questionable economics and business logic and its impact on U.S. energy security.

The proposal, which would include a rail system ending at tiny Fort Nelson, B.C., would also threaten Canada's unique energy relationship with the United States, energy experts and economists said.

"It's in the realm of George W. Bush's comment, 'Let's send someone to Mars', " said energy commentator Michael Lynch, president of Amherst, Mass.- based Strategic Energy & Economic Research Inc.

Email to a friendPrinter friendly

Font:

• *
• *
• *
• *

"It's a nice idea, but after they look at the costs and the benefits, it's going to be a long time in the future," Mr. Lynch said.

Yesterday morning in Moscow, Viktor Razbegin, deputy head of industrial research at the Russian Economy Ministry, told reporters that state organizations in partnership with private companies would build and manage the energy corridor, known as TKM-World Link.

The 6,000-kilometre corridor from Siberia into the United States includes a 100-kilometre tunnel under the Bering Strait. It will be more than twice as long as the underwater section of the Channel Tunnel between the U.K. and France. The undersea tunnel would contain a highspeed railway, highway and pipelines, as well as power and fiberoptic cables.

According to a Bloomberg News report, proponents will meet with Canadian and U.S. government officials for a formal presentation next week.

A supporter of the project is former Alaskan governor Walter Joseph Hickel, who is co-chairing a conference on the venture in Moscow next week. Ralph Klein, former premier of Alberta, has recently discussed energy initiatives with the Russians, according to a spokesman for the Russian embassy.

Brooke Grantham, spokesman for Canada's department of foreign affairs and international trade, said Ottawa is not aware of the project.

"We are not aware of any Canadian representatives who have been contacted," he said, adding the idea was not mentioned as recently as late March during a Canada-Russia business summit in Ottawa.

Russian embassy spokesman Sergei Qhudiaqov confirmed the plan is being considered, but was unaware of any meetings next week in Canada.

Greg Stringham, vice-president of the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers, said similar plans have been floated by the Russians in the past, but went nowhere.

The first came as far back as 1905, when Tsar Nicholas II, Russia's last emperor, approved a plan for a tunnel under the Bering Strait, 38 years after his grandfather sold Alaska to the United States for US$7.2-million. The First World War ended the project.

Mr. Strigham said the latest ruminations about an oil pipeline were made as recently as six years ago. "I know it has been extremely difficult to justify it economically in the past," he said.

Critics questioned the plan's practicality, considering that both the Alaska Highway and Mackenzie Valley natural gas pipelines from the Arctic to Alberta have struggled to get off the ground after three decades of planning, said energy economist Vince Lauerman, president of Geopolitics Central Inc., a research firm in Calgary. Mr. Lynch said another glaring weakness is that it doesn't make sense to have a connection between two Arctic regions with sparse populations and economies.

"You're sort of going from one fairly underdeveloped, underpopulated place to another that's somewhat underdeveloped and underpopulated and doing it an extremely expensive way," he said.

Judith Dwarkin, chief economist at Ross Smith Energy Group in Calgary, said the project could face significant environmental issues with burrowing under the Bering Strait. In addition, it would cross a major geological fault line. "Given current attitudes, the U.S. may perceive 'security' issues from relying on Russian energy supplies," she said.

Considering the project's questionable business sense, some critics wondered if Russia has ulterior motives in proposing such a grandiose plan.

In Europe, there is heightened anxiety over its dependence on Russian natural gas, which many fear could be used to further the Kremlin's international political agenda.

Canadian lawyer Robert Amsterdam, who defended jailed Russian oil tycoon Mikhail Khodorkovsky, said Russia is notorious for floating big plans to curry favour from foreign governments and companies but that go nowhere.

"God forbid our politicians take it seriously," Mr. Amsterdam said. "When I keep telling people that Russia uses energy as a weapon, these mega-project prognostications, now I can say quite frankly, 'Follow the Shtokman theme.' They lead countries by the nose; countries literally change their foreign policy so as not to confront the Russians based on these carrots, and then end up more often than not with nothing."

jharding@nationalpost.com

- - -

HOW OTHER MEGA-PROJECTS STACK UP

THE CHUNNEL

A 50-kilometre tunnel under the English Channel

Years to build More than seven

Total cost US$15-billion

PANAMA CANAL

A 50-mile canal that divides North and South America

Years to build 34, between 1880-1914

Total cost for original plan About US$375-million

Total cost of Panama expansion plan US$5.25-billion

THREE GORGES DAM

A 600-kilometre reservoir in China

Years to build 12, from 1994- 2006 (not fully operational until 2009)

Total cost Official estimate is US$25-billion, however, the unofficial estimate is US$100-billion, more than any other single construction project in China's history

MONTREAL'S OLYMPIC STADIUM

A capacity of 65,255

Years to build Begun in 1973, but not completed until 1987

Total cost $2.3-billion (including additional costs, interest and repairs)

SHEPPARD SUBWAY LINE

A 6.4-kilometre stretch in the north end of Toronto

Years to build eight

Total cost $933.9-million

MACKENZIE VALLEY PIPELINE

A 1,220-km pipeline system

Years to build Goal is to have natural gas moving through the pipeline by 2010, but the project has been discussed since the 1970s and there is no date for construction to begin

Estimated cost $7-billion

************************

Russians dream of tunnel to Alaska

By Eurasia analyst Malcolm Haslett

Russian officials have expressed new confidence over building a tunnel under the sea to link eastern Siberia and the US state of Alaska. But is it really viable?

The dream of linking the American and Eurasian land-masses at their closest point - 40 km of sea in the Bering Straits - has been around for a long time.

But the idea dropped out of sight, perhaps for obvious reasons.

The tunnel would link remote parts of Russia and Alaska

Firstly Russia sold Alaska to the United States in 1867. Secondly, the regions on either side of the Bering Strait are among the most remote and least-developed in their respective countries.

On the US side there are settlements along the stretch of coast facing Russia, but they are not connected with the rest of Alaska by either road or rail. The nearest main road is at Fairbanks, almost 1,000km away, and Alaska has no rail connections at all with Canada or the rest of the United States.

On the Russian side the situation is even worse. The nearest road of any sort is about 1,500km from the straits, near the city of Magadan.

The idea is bound to capture the imagination of at least some of the more romantic entrepreneurs in North America

And Magadan is remote even by Russian standards. It would take enormous investment to link the country's easternmost point with the road network or with the BAM (Baikal-Amur Magistral) railway line.

Severe weather conditions and difficult terrain - including permafrost regions, mountains and summer swamps - would make building overland links very difficult and expensive.

Add to that the normal technical and geological complications of building long tunnels and one is faced with certainly the most ambitious and expensive tunneling project ever undertaken.

The tunnel would be longer than the one under the English Channel

At 37km, the Bering Strait is only slightly wider than the English Channel, which is 34km wide.

But the man who has been the Russia-US tunnel's most enthusiastic backer, Viktor Razbegin, director of a Transport project centre in Moscow, admits that for geological reasons the tunnel would have to be much longer than the present Channel linking France and England.

Nonetheless, he suggests, there is real enthusiasm, and potentially money, for the project on the Russian side.

But would there be any chance of winning major investment in America.

Although the region is one of the very poorest in the Russian Federation, there lie under its soil rich deposits of oil, gold and coal

The idea is bound to capture the imagination of at least some of the more romantic entrepreneurs in North America.

Yet most are likely to be put off by the sheer size of the enterprise, and severe doubts about the returns. Would the amount of traffic through such a tunnel generate revenues remotely sufficient to repay investment in it?

One Russian who may think it would is the new governor of Chukotka, Roman Abramovich.

Russian rail links stop far short of the remote tunnel zone

The rich and ambitious oil tycoon, elected the region's MP last year, recently consolidated his influence over the sparsely-populated region - which has an adult population of less than 50,000 - by being elected governor.

He knows that although the region is one of the very poorest in the Russian Federation, rich deposits of oil, gold and coal lie under its soil.

With sufficient investment it could become, literally, a goldmine. Roman Abramovich certainly thinks so. And that may be one reason for Viktor Razbegin's confidence that the tunnel idea has a future.

The rest of the world, however, may need a lot of convincing.

US 'to build Libyan nuclear plant'

US 'to build Libyan nuclear plant'

Gaddafi re-established diplomatic ties with the US last year [EPA] The US is to help Libya build its first-ever nuclear power plant according to the African nation's official news agency, Jana. Jana said on Monday that the General People's Committee, the Libyan parliamentary body, had given approval for the foreign ministry to sign a deal with the US the day before. There was no immediate confirmation of the deal from the US, but any such agreement would continue a considerable thawing of relations between the two countries. 'American pressure' Guma El-Gamaty, a researcher on Libyan affairs, told Al Jazeera: "It is a significant reward for Gaddafi and a sign of how far relations between America and Libya have come. "Gaddafi's regime has become strong ally of America in its 'war on terror' ... supplying information about Islamic groups around the world that may prove a threat to the US." He said: "This will send a diplomatic signal to other more crucial countries, like Iran and North Korea, that if they follow Libya's example and completely capitulate and give up to American pressure and toe the American line ... they will be rewarded." Libya had long been suspected by some governments in the west of attempting to develop weapons of mass destruction. But in 2003 Muammar Gaddafi, the country's long-term leader, renounced all attempts to develop a non-conventional arsenal, clearing the way for the restoration of diplomatic relations with the US in May last year. Gaddafi did, however, maintain his desire to develop nuclear technology for peaceful purposes. Technical assistance The deal to be signed shortly with the US would include building a nuclear power plant, helping develop water desalination capacity, joint research and technical projects and training Libyan technicians in the US. "The General People's Committee authorised on Sunday the General People's Committee for Liaison and International Cooperation to sign the agreement related to Libyan-American cooperation in the peaceful use of nuclear energy," Jana said. On March 3, Gaddafi renewed a recent complaint that Western countries had failed to properly compensate Libya for scrapping its nuclear arms programme and as a result countries like Iran and North Korea would not follow his lead. Fears over finite oil and gas supplies and climate change have meant nuclear power is seen increasingly as a way of producing energy and cutting emissions of carbon dioxide. Libya has proven oil reserves of 39 billion barrels, enough for 60 years at current production rates. Its largely unexploited gas reserves are estimated at 53 trillion cubic feet.

Halliburton's Dubai move draws flak

Halliburton's Dubai move draws flak

Leading Democrats such as Hillary Clinton, right, have demanded answers [EPA] US oil services giant Halliburton's decision to move its base from Texas to Dubai has sparked outrage from leading Democrats such as Hillary Clinton, the New York senator and presidential candidate. US Democrats plan to seek a congressional review of the decision, saying it is motivated by greed. Dick Cheney, who headed Halliburton before becoming US vice-president, said the move was to capitalise on the booming energy sector in the Gulf region. Supporters blame corporate reform laws in the US which they say are harming the business environment in the country. Clinton questioned if Halliburton had meant to "quit paying taxes in America" by deciding to relocate to Dubai. "They get a lot of government contracts; is this going to affect the investigations that are going on? "Because we have a lot of evidence of misuse of government contracts and how they have cheated the American soldier and cheated the American taxpayer," she said. The company is being investigated by the Securities and Exchange Commission and the US justice department over allegations of improper business affairs in Iraq, Kuwait and Nigeria. Business decision Halliburton said it was relocating to Dubai for business reasons and would not retrench staff. Melissa Norcross, a company spokeswoman, also said Halliburton would remain incorporated in the US. "As such, we anticipate absolutely no tax benefits from this decision," she said. Dave Lesar, the chief executive, will move his office from Houston, Texas, to Dubai, but other top officers would remain situated in Houston, added Norcross. The company has more than 45,000 employees in 70 countries. Corporate greed Leading Democrats say the move is to avoid taxes. Patrick Leahy, the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, called the move "an example of corporate greed at its worst". "At the same time that they'll be avoiding US taxes, I'm sure they won't stop insisting on taking their profits in cold hard US cash," Leahy said. Byron Dorgan, a Democratic senator, said he would seek a congressional review of Halliburton's announcement. "I want to know, is Halliburton trying to run away from bad publicity on their contracts? "Or are they trying to set up a corporate presence in Dubai so that they can avoid the restrictions that currently exist on doing business with prohibited countries like Iran?" But Halliburton has found a supporter in Bill White, the mayor of Houston. Frank Michel, a spokesman for White, said: "The mayor says he understands the nature of the decision. "He doesn't think it will negatively impact Houston or our status as an international energy centre."

Toronto: $7.8B budget passes, free golf and all

$7.8B budget passes, free golf and all

Speak Out: Perks for councillors City on verge of bankruptcy

City councillors' perks left intact despite warnings of financial crisis

Apr 24, 2007 04:30 AM

Jim Byers
city hall bureau chief

Faced with an enormous budget crisis, Toronto city councillors had a chance to save taxpayers money and take a whack at some of their perks of power.

But when all was said and done, after an hour of going over everything from free coffee and juice at council meetings to free passes to city golf courses and the Toronto Zoo, council adopted a $7.8 billion operating budget yesterday that left all their goodies intact.

This despite a warning from city manager Shirley Hoy just last week that the city has "hit the wall" financially, thanks to years of draining reserves – and the cold shoulder the city has gotten from the province on its demand for $71 million in social-service funding.

With Mayor David Miller firmly in control of the budget process preceding Friday's full-council debate and yesterday's vote, that the budget would go through unscathed was close to a fait accompli.

So it was Councillor Rob Ford's annual budget-cut performance that proved the most captivating part of yesterday's debate. A renowned penny pincher, Ford has been trying for seven years to get fellow politicians to cut back on at least some of their many perks.

The councillor for Ward 2 (Etobicoke North) came agonizingly close to winning one vote yesterday, but his motion to deny councillors free passes for city-owned golf courses – worth an estimated $15,000 per year – lost on a 22-22 vote.

"They're all just self-serving individuals," he said of fellow councillors. "You saw the greed there. They blame the province (for the city's financial problems) but they still won't cut one cent of their own perks."

Council voted 27-15 in favour of an operating budget that will see owners of single-family homes hit with a 3.8 per cent tax hike; about $81 on the average Toronto home. Owners of commercial, industrial and multi-residential properties will pay 1.267 per cent more in property taxes.

The budget calls for one last massive raid on the city's legally accessible reserves, which officials say are down to their last dimes.

City politicians also voted to stick to their plan to take the province to court over what they say is a missing $71 million payment on certain social-service costs. They tacked on another motion yesterday, voting to send Queen's Park a bill for $698 million to cover the cost of downloaded provincial programs the city has been stuck paying for since 1998.

Ford claimed his 45 suggestions for budget cutting could save $100 million and avoid the tax hike altogether.

But they didn't impress Councillor Pam McConnell (Ward 28, Toronto Centre-Rosedale). Ford, she said, makes a big show of his budget proposals on the council floor but doesn't roll up his sleeves during the budget process.

"I think that he's chosen frivolous things, and I think that he makes a mockery of the whole budget process," she said. "So out of $9-whatever-billion he makes a joke, and I don't think it's very funny."

Suggestions included cutting staff at the city and at all city agencies, boards and commissions (except police) by 2 per cent and freezing salaries for non-union employees.

Ford also said the city could save $59,000 by not giving out up to three bottles of wine a day to people in the city's harm-reduction program at the Seaton House shelter. And he rankled fellow councillors by suggesting an end to a series of free passes, a $40,000 media-clipping service and a $77,000 program to water plants in city buildings.

The golf passes (councillors get a free round of golf for four people at one of the city-owned courses once a season) lost on the tie vote, and a few other votes were at least close.

But most were shot down with ease.

Miller defended the passes as features aimed at getting politicians to check out city services, such as the TTC. But he said he supported the idea of ending the free green fees.

"I think people can afford to pay for their own golf," Miller said.

"Almost everything that was in those motions, as soon as you examine it, it doesn't make any sense," he said.

"To end the harm-reduction program, what you'd be saying is, `We're going to allow people who have a severe alcohol dependencies to be on our streets, untreated, often drinking the worst kinds of alcohol, as opposed to treating them in a harm-reduction program that is world-renowned.'"

"The only significant money was to end the sidewalk snow removal (a move Ford said would save $3.4 million), and I don't agree with that. People are aging ... and we need to ensure our sidewalks are free of snow and ice."

Councillor Denzil Minnan-Wong (Ward 34, Don Valley East) agreed that council shouldn't ask for help from senior governments unless it's willing to bleed a little itself.

"We're on the edge right now," he said when asked about the city's potential bankruptcy. "There's no gas in the engine. This is a warning to the mayor that he has to start to work. He has to show some leadership."

Miller said he didn't support the idea of seeking $698 million more from Queen's Park but that council decided to send the invoice.

"Staff have direction," he said when asked what happens next. "It's obviously a gesture."

Miller leaves NDP, shifts to neutral

COLIN MCCONNELL/TORONTO STAR

Mayor David Miller told the Toronto Star yesterday he and Premier Dalton McGuinty have always understood each other.

Mayor doesn't want to be seen as partisan by Ottawa and Queen's Park

Apr 18, 2007 04:30 AM

Jim Byers
City Hall Bureau Chief

Mayor David Miller is no longer a member of the New Democratic Party.

Miller told the Star yesterday he has let his party membership lapse because he has important dealings with both the federal and provincial governments this year. He said his understanding of party membership is that it ends at the end of each calendar year and that he simply didn't renew his membership for 2007.

"There are very critical inter-governmental issues for the City of Toronto, and I don't want to be in a position where people could accuse me of being partisan," he said. "I haven't been. But I want it to be very clear I'm not. My role as mayor inter-governmentally is far too important right now."

Miller said he didn't think his NDP membership was an issue in the past.

"But there are provincial and federal elections coming up, and provincial and federal politicians become exceptionally partisan during elections. And given it's such a critical time right now for Toronto I don't want to be accused of it."

Asked if this is only a temporary move, he replied, "I think it will be fairly permanent as long as I'm mayor." Miller also said he has no intention of joining a different political party.

Does this mean he's rejecting NDP philosophy?

"No," Miller said, "but as mayor it's a very practical job. You do lose interest in partisan politics. I have to work with a provincial government that's Liberal and a federal government that's Conservative and occasionally with other provinces that are NDP, and I need the ability to work with all of them on behalf of the people of Toronto. And, yes, city councillors also belong to many parties."

Asked if he thought his status outside the NDP might help in his current dispute with the province over a $71 million payment for social services, Miller replied, "I don't see it as a ... significant issue or I would've announced it (the end of his NDP affiliation). I just let it lapse (instead). But to the extent anyone would think anything I was doing was because of partisan considerations, I would hope this would clarify that."

Miller will push for one cent of the federal GST during the next federal election and has said he'll push for a better financial deal from Queen's Park during the fall provincial campaign.

He told the Star's editorial board yesterday he will speak about Toronto's issues and party platforms but won't endorse individual candidates or parties.

Despite the city's budget crisis, Miller said he hasn't had a serious conversation with Premier Dalton McGuinty for nearly six weeks. But that doesn't mean their relationship has soured.

"We haven't had a chance to have dinner at my house lately. But I've always thought we had a respectful relationship, that we understood each other."

Miller said McGuinty's Liberal government has helped the city in the past, but that that doesn't mitigate the need for Queen's Park to give the city the $71 million it owes for social service programs. And while he doesn't like the idea of taking the province to court to settle the issue – a proposed tactic that goes to city council for a decision Friday – Miller said he has no choice.

McGuinty and Miller's staffs talk all the time, but Miller said he's not going to be picking up the phone any time soon to talk about the $71 million. And he said his pride isn't getting in the way.

"We've made our case. They know it. If I speak to the premier I know what he'll say. He'll say, `David, I agree with you, you're right, I always thought downloading was wrong ... but we don't have the money.' But that isn't true."

On Friday, a proposed $7.8 billion budget will be debated by city council. It includes a 3.8 per cent property tax hike for single-family homes and 1.3 per cent on commercial, industrial and multi-residential properties. It also includes drawing $400 million from reserves, draining virtually all that's left of legally accessible savings.

Miller said suggestions by Queen's Park that Toronto doesn't have its economic house in order are out of line.

"That argument is absolutely false. It's always been false. It is utter nonsense. Absolute, complete nonsense."

He pointed to a chart showing the city has increased its spending by roughly 4 per cent a year between 1998 and 2007. But he said the federal government has hiked its annual spending by 7.9 per cent in that period, while the province's spending has risen 7.5 per cent per year.

But a chart given to city councillors also shows that the city has substantially increased spending on what it calls core municipal services. In 2003, the city spent $681.4 million on those items, which include planning and transportation. The figure rose to $785.6 million by last year, and will grow to $825.6 million in the coming budget. That's a hike of 21.2 per cent in four years.

"If people, when they say we don't have our house in order, mean we should close library branches and swimming pools, I'm sorry, I don't agree with that," Miller said. "You can't point to this budget and find an area where there's been a significant increase in spending on programs that are under our control."

With files from Ian Urquhart, Rob Ferguson and Paul Moloney

Don Cherry vs. Garth Turner???

Don Cherry vs. Garth Turner???


This comes from Garth's blog. I suspect Don Cherry is a Conservative but would he actually get into politics???

Awaiting the messiah

I know you woke up this morning, turned to your sweetie, brushed away a curler and a crushed Bud can and said, “I really wonder how the potential electoral campaign in Halton is going…” Well, this is your happy moment.

Had a Globe reporter call me during House duty today to talk about just that. She told me the Conservatives, firmly in the grip of the famous Doug Finley, Scotland’s gift to corporate punishment, have now assembled a list of 40 must-win ridings across the country. These are the ground zeros where the coveted majority government could be won. Halton is on it.

But I knew that. So did you. After all, my coming electoral demise (if the Tories get their way), will be just the latest in the number of times they have killed me. Ousted from caucus, stripped of my nomination, barred from running ever again, banished to the distant Himalayas of the opposition benches, thrown from my office, and now routinely pilloried in the House and on all those red meat Conservative web sites, not to mention by the bugs who work at the Western Standard.

So it’s only natural and expected that the coming election campaign in Halton will be world class in terms of its vitriol. Already started, actually. Monte Solberg came in to diss me and say I had been rescued from indie oblivion by ‘the captain of the Titanic.’ Gee, wonder who that is?

Conservative MPs like Peterborough’s Dean del Mastro (who voted against having hearings into the income trust tax) and some cabmins like John Baird and the prickish Peter van Loan, have been flooding Halton with literature. We call then “ten percenters” – brochures MPs are allowed to send to 10% of their riding at any one time. Rules allow members to divert these things from their own constituencies and direct them elsewhere from time to time. And right now Halton residents are finding their blue boxes brimming.

And how about my Conservative opposition? Well, three guys have now declared themselves as candidates – two of whom I defeated for the CPC nomination two years ago and have yet to recover, and a newcomer whose platform is getting more federal funding for local sports. The local Conservative association, which has raised no money since the last election (other than the thirty grand my campaign left), and which lost half its executive (they’re now working with me), has yet to call a nomination meeting date. Word is there are seeking The Really Big candidate to knock me off.

At first it was believed to be a Mike Harris cabinet minister colleague of Jim Flaherty and John Baird, but he was sadly charged with weapons offences. Now I hear Finley is begging Don Cherry to run against me – which would make a lot of sense. I mean who wouldn’t want to trade public adulation, network TV and a fabulous income, for this job?

Anyway, I am sure some firecracker will come along and get the Tory nod, and it will be one hell of a campaign. There are at least 15,000 hard-core Conservative voters in Halton who hate me. That’s the bad news. The good news is there are 130,000 others who, like most Canadians, think about politics as often as it is deserved. It will be for the winning candidate to appeal to them, offering what all voters want in a local MP. That, simply, is a person who puts voters ahead of party; who is unafraid to stand up against a leader or a prime minister when the need arises; who’s knocked on thousands of doors; who is instantly responsive; who’s willing to champion middle-class causes; and who has the guts to be accountable in public meetings, regardless of how sharp the criticism might be, and doesn’t go hide in Ottawa.

Seems simple to me. But can I skate?

posted by Garth Turner on 04.23.07 @ 10:18 pm |

905 faces big tax hikes

905 faces big tax hikes

Graphic: 905 tax hikes

Unlike in T.O., politicians in the suburbs are levying big tax hikes to try to balance budgets

Apr 23, 2007 04:30 AM

Phinjo Gombu
Staff Reporter

Toronto may be near bankruptcy, yet the property tax increase councillors will vote on today is a modest 3.8 per cent.

If you want to see real pain, look to the suburban municipalities, where taxes have been going up steadily for the past five years – sometimes dramatically.

In Pickering, they're rising 8.7 per cent this year, triple the inflation rate. In Newmarket, it's 6.5 per cent. In Brampton, 6.6 per cent. And in Vaughan, there's a proposal for a 6.2 per cent increase that has yet to be voted on. Like Toronto, the smaller cities aren't happy with the legacy of provincial downloading, where Ontario governments arbitrarily transferred to municipalities responsibility for such things as certain social services – along with the millions of dollars in associated costs.

Local governments say it's unfair to make them boost property taxes to pay for provincial services.

Unlike Toronto, where the city has relied on provincial bailouts and borrowing from reserve funds to pay the bills while keeping tax increases down, suburban politicians haven't been afraid to give voters bad news. Across the GTA, downloading and its accompanying problems has meant large property-tax boosts in recent years, after almost a decade of zero or tiny increases.

Mississauga Councillor Carolyn Parrish, who chairs a Peel Region committee looking at problems associated with downloading, says that when it comes to raising taxes, Toronto politicians simply lack the guts.

She is also unimpressed with Toronto's recent threat to take the province to court to seek $71 million – the equivalent of another 3.8 per cent tax hike – to pay for some social service costs.

"Toronto's recent discovery of this inequity" is not legitimate, said Parrish, because it's been a thorny issue for years in the rest of the GTA.

Criticism of Toronto aside, Parrish and other suburban officials say the situation is becoming untenable.

Property taxes will go through the roof unless, they say, Queen's Park does a dramatic U-turn and takes back responsibility for social and medical programs foisted on them by previous Conservative governments. On that, at least, they are on common ground with Toronto.

Adding to the problem, however, is the fact that many suburban municipalities are aging, with roads, community centres and old-age homes hitting the end of their normal 35-year lifespan.

"In my view, infrastructure is the most significant challenge and it will continue to increase in terms of significance over the next number of years," says Rob MacIsaac, chair of the Greater Toronto Transportation Authority and former mayor of Burlington.

MacIsaac describes a "double whammy" – the flattening of income from assessments in recent years in many municipalities combined with the looming infrastructure crunch. He also says that, from a public policy point of view, downloading is particularly problematic if the economy takes a turn for the worse and even more pressure is put on the property tax base, which could prove disastrous.

"Municipalities for years have been under-investing in their infrastructure, and that has resulted in a massive bill that is accumulating. And as cities get older, those costs become more and more difficult to ignore."

Ajax Mayor Steve Parish explains the problem. "The typical taxpayer sees their taxes going up and up and up and says, `You guys are spending money like drunken sailors.' The reality is that we have to increase our taxes because the (city's) growth isn't paying for itself."

The argument goes that because municipalities are required to pay for social services from property taxes, and development charges aren't fully paying for the cost of new growth, fewer dollars are available to build items such as community centres and roads, or even to maintain them.

It has led to what the Association of Municipalities of Ontario calls the "$3 billion provincial-municipal gap," which it says "makes it impossible" for municipalities to invest adequately in the nuts and bolts of communities.

"That's property tax money that's not going towards municipal services," says an AMO official.

Peel is a case in point. The region anchored by Mississauga saw no tax hikes between 1990 and 2001. It has increased spending on infrastructure by 191 per cent, to $1.9 billion, over the past five years, compared to $650 million during the preceding five years. And the bills keep rising.

For example, says Peel treasurer Dan Labrecque, almost all the public housing units the province dumped on cities are "at the end of their life cycle."

"Our housing budgets are going to increase by 30 to 40 per cent in the next decade."

Labrecque says the region's net operating budget (the portion funded by property tax) is about $70 million.

"We need to grow that by at least $30 million just to cover maintenance needs," he says. "That's 40 per cent plus inflation on the whole package, however we slice it. It (has) a major impact."

One big sore point for the suburban regions – the past practice of "pooling" hundreds of millions of dollars to help pay for social services in Toronto – has been eased thanks to a provincial decision to chip in on those costs.

But other problems persist.

One major frustration for suburban cities is a restriction on the use of development charges – not much of an issue for a fully built city like Toronto.

Another initiative of the Mike Harris government, the restriction allows growing cities, or lower tier municipalities such as Mississauga, Brampton, Vaughan, Markham and Oshawa, to use only 90 per cent of fees paid by developers to fund such services as new parks, community centres and libraries. The remainder, Harris said, had to be made up with property taxes, meaning that the cost of growth was no longer fully covered by levies on developers.

Regional governments, such as Peel, Durham and York, also have issues with the rules surrounding development charges because they can't use the charges to pay for waste management, again putting pressure on the property tax base.

All these issues are the subject of intense negotiations between the Association of Municipalities of Ontario and the provincial government.

So where's the tax revolt?

For the most part, taxpayers continue to re-elect their high-tax mayors and councillors.

David Lewis Stein, who teaches a course on municipal issues at Innis College at the University of Toronto, said he's sympathetic to the plight of the "edge cities" because they've been more realistic about the "real cost of running" a city.

Not so with Toronto, argues Stein.

Former mayor Mel Lastman froze taxes for years and Miller pledged to hold his hikes down to the level of inflation.

"If you look back historically, they (the suburban municipalities) were steadily increasing their taxes to meet their needs and to meet the costs of downloading, while Toronto had a three-year hiatus where they simply froze taxes under Mel Lastman," said Stein.

"This was unrealistic."

Happy Earth Day

Happy Earth Day:

Today is a great day to reflect on some of the things we can do as individuals to improve the environment. This might include planting trees, changing to more efficient light bulbs, reducing waste, buying local foods, using less electricity, one meatless meal per week, and using alternative transportation more frequently are some examples of things we can all do to improve the environment. In Newmarket-Aurora, the Holland River clean up is a great event on May 5. In Ward 3, the Glenn Cedar forest clean up is another opportunity to improve the community directly. The environment is rapidly becoming the number one threat facing humanity and is an issue Canadians care a great deal about. Today is an opportunity to reflect on how each of us can best do our part.

According to www.earthday.ca, here are the top 10 actions we can all take:
http://www.earthday.ca/pub/resources/top10.php

You can also calculate your carbon foot print by visiting the link below:
http://www.climatecrisis.net/takeaction/carboncalculator/



Thanks for reading...


Darryl

Greens nominate Hubbers!

Green Party nominates Glenn Hubbers!

Glenn Hubbers was nominated yesterday winning 87% of the vote against party new comer Eve Simson. More details to come...


www.hubbers.ca
www.newmarketauroragreens.org

Tim Jones to Replace Belinda?

[Photo Credit: www.belinda.ca]

Tim Jones to Replace Belinda?:

It is unclear if there will be a race for the federal Liberal nomination in Newmarket-Aurora. I am hearing at this time, odds are most in favour of Tim Jones replacing Belinda Stronach. In November Tim Jones was defeated by Phillis Morris in the Aurora mayor race. Tim Jones is the former mayor of Aurora and is known as a huge supporter of Belinda Stronach. When Belinda was a Conservative, Mr. Jones attended all of the Conservative riding events at the time. When Belinda became a Liberal, Jones quickly got involved with the Liberal party most recently getting elected as VP Policy at the most recent local Liberal riding association AGM. Tim Jones participated as part of Team Belinda in both the Newmarket and Aurora's Bowling for Kids Sake events in support of Big Brothers and Big Sisters of York Region. The recent Tim Jones tribute dinner for South Lake Hospital showed Tim still has a very loyal following based on the 300 people gathered at Dinardos celebrating his 28 years of service to the community. Tim Jones offers elected experience and name recognition, however some baggage remains from his time as mayor. Expect an official candidate to be named within 90 days or in time for an election should one be called over the next few weeks. Lois Brown is already the nominated candidate to run for the Conservative Party. Glenn Hubbers just got elected today as Green Party candidate. The NDP do not have a candidate at this time.

Liberals also must name a provincial candidate in time for the October 10 election. At this point no one has stepped forward to challenge Frank Klees in the riding of Newmarket-Aurora. I am also not aware of any provincial NDP or Green candidate to have been nominated at this time either.

Thanks for reading...

Darryl

*********

Emanuel decides not to run for federal nomination:


April 21, 2007


Friends and Supporters,

Every since Belinda Stronach announced her decision to not seek re-election many of you encouraged me to consider seeking the Federal Liberal Nomination to become our next MP. While disappointed that Belinda will not be running again herself, I have truly been humbled by the show of support and cannot fully express my appreciation.

In 2003 when I first ran municipally, my decision was based on a desire to bring fresh ideas and a new perspective to Newmarket Council. Since that time I believe we have accomplished a great deal. Receiving 85% of the vote in Ward 7 this past election was certainly an indication of satisfaction with the direction our Town is headed.

However, I still believe there is a lot more to accomplish on the municipal front. It is for this reason that I have decided not to seek the Federal Liberal nomination. I made a commitment to the residents of Ward 7 and I look forward to continue working for Ward 7.

I will be enthusiastically standing behind Tim Jones, former Mayor of Aurora and long time Councillor, as he seeks the nomination. I know he is the right guy for the job.

Once again, thank you for your support and encouragement.

Regards,

Chris Emanuel

Tories on verge of Que. "breakthrough," says Mulroney

Tories on verge of Que. "breakthrough," says Mulroney

• View Larger Image

Prime Minister Stephen Harper and former Prime Minister Brian Mulroney arrive at the banquet to present an award to Mulroney at the Chateau Laurier in Ottawa, Wednesday, April 18.

Photograph by : Canadian Press

Jack Aubry, CanWest News Service; Ottawa Citizen

Published: Thursday, April 19, 2007

OTTAWA - Brian Mulroney says Prime Minister Stephen Harper and the Conservatives are on the verge of a "major breakthrough" in Quebec in the next election, building on the 10 seats the party won in 2006.

The former prime minister predicted that leadership will be the key issue in the upcoming election and that Harper is perceived by Canadians as being "very strong".

"So I think he's got an excellent chance of making a major breakthrough. I thought the breakthrough he made last time was remarkable. Ten seats is big if you are a Conservative in Quebec and I think he'll probably do a lot better in the next election," said Mulroney, who himself swept the province in the 1984 election as the leader of the Progressive Conservative party.

Mulroney dropped in on Harper at his Centre Block office on Parliament Hill Wednesday afternoon along with former Ontario premier Mike Harris and former Reform party leader Preston Manning.

Mulroney served two terms as prime minister from 1984 to 1993.

Apparently referring to recent positive polls, Mulroney seemed to suggest that Harper and his government should continue governing the country.

"Well, I think Mr. Harper seems to be doing ... the public seems to think he's doing a good job. He is moving along nicely with a pretty crisp agenda. My guess is that's what he'll continue to do," said Mulroney.

Recent polls have shown Harper with a convincing lead over Liberal Leader Stephane Dion when it comes to questions about leadership and the government's performance.

Mulroney was in Ottawa Wednesday to attend a dinner that was honouring his recognition of Ukraine as an independent nation 15 years ago, as well as raise money for the treatment of children who are victims of the Chernobyl nuclear disaster.

Harper was scheduled to introduce the former prime minister at the dinner, and in a copy of the speech provided beforehand, Harper was to remind the audience that Mulroney was tagged as "Canada's greenest prime minister" by Green Leader Elizabeth May.

He also said Mulroney restored Canada's reputation as "a reliable ally in the struggle against Communist tyranny" even though some criticized him for not remaining neutral as "an honest broker".

"We were told that we should learn to live with Communism - that we have nothing to worry about from the Soviet empire," he said. "Brian Mulroney did not agree. Under his leadership, Canada took a stand."

He added that Mulroney, along with Ronald Reagan, Margaret Thatcher and Pope John Paul II stood "firm against the Communists and their apologists."

Conservative Plan for the Environment

Conservative Plan for the Environment

It looks like the Conservatives are about to release a strong and credible climate change plan that is realistic and far stronger than anything Liberals have done or promised to do in the past. If this leak to the Globe is accurate, I believe Conservatives will have a tangible record to take back to the people. They have shown willing to fund public transit and provide transit incentives. There are local initiatives such as the Oak Ridges Marine and Lake Simcoe right here in York Region. There is funding for wind power, hydrogen fuel cell technology, ethanol and biodiesel and other green technologies. Consumers receive incentives for hybrid cars and a tax for buying Hummer and SUV vehicles. There are tax incentives for making our homes more efficient. Funding has been provided to the provinces to deal with their local environmental plans. Action is being taken on dangerous chemicals, smog and now there is a clear plan on the table for green house gases and addressing Kyoto. A 6% reduction from 1990 levels is an attainable goal given that emissions have risen every year since the treaty has been signed to date.

The government realizes it has to do its part and they will also introduce industry regulations that will force business to do their part as well. Ultimately what is most encouraging is that individuals are starting to take action by changing their light bulbs and beginning to make greener choices. The cooperation of these three sectors of our society is what will allow Canada to fulfill its responsibilities with regards to the environment. At the Blue Jays home opener there was commercial outlining investments Rogers made to make the former Skydome more environmentally friendly.

Stephen Harper said he would be as "green as Canadians want him to be". I think he has found the right balance between the economy and the environment. It is a great improvement to see real action and not just empty promises and political alliances.

Thanks for reading...

Darryl

Liberal deal MAY cost Greens debate

Liberal deal MAY cost Greens debate

Sporting a red shirt and all smiles as she calls a press conference with Stephane Dion, Liberal environment critic Elizabeth May insists she hasn't crossed the floor. The picture above looks very similar to Paul Martin's hand shake with Belinda or Harper's press conference with Wajid Khan. The back door politics and back scratching means the Greens are no different than the other parties putting partisanship before policy. This deal is great. Dion isn't running a Liberal candidate against Peter MacKay or the Greens because he has already found one in May. The Green Party will in return drop their argument that they run candidates in every riding in the country because Stephane Dion is too good on the environment to oppose. Make sense??? Of course not, all these two leaders share is that they are both equal disasters for their party.

Who gets screwed in this deal? The Liberal and Green grassroots and candidates. Liberals in Central Nova may or may not join the Green Party. Some will go to second place NDP while others will just join Peter MacKay. Liberal organization in that riding may be weak for a decade as Liberals try and get back old supporters in future elections. It also makes Dion look weak as a leader teaming up with a marginal player and further emphasizing that he is a one trick pony on the environment. Both these two are not leaders. For May this is a selfish move that improves her chances of getting a seat while selling out her party. In a riding like Newmarket-Aurora where it is generally a two party race between the Conservatives and Liberals; May is largely saying vote Liberal to keep Harper from being Prime Minister. She main gain a seat but let down her supporters in the process.

Locally in this riding Glenn Hubbers is a man who walks the talk when it comes to the environment. His career is related to the environment. He traded in an inefficient car for a more environmentally friendly one. He does his part within his day to day life to constantly live as a Green. In the last election he represented his party extremely well and pushed the environment long before it was cool. Anyone who reads his blog at www.hubbers.ca can see he knows what he is talking about and has a passion for that file. Beyond that he is not just a one trick environmental pony, he realizes the Green Party has a full platform that goes beyond the environment. May doesn't seem to realize this point.

What has Dion specifically done that makes him a better environmentalist than Harper or Layton? He handed out green scarfs at the Liberal convention and added a green line to the Liberal webpage. He talks about the environment and named his dog Kyoto. Polls show of the three leaders Layton is seen as best on the environment. In terms of action, Harper has done more in 13 months than the Liberals have in 13 years. We might have made our Kyoto targets if the Liberals intended to implement the accord immediately after it was signed. Even Michael Ignatieff realized "we didn't get it done" on the environment when Dion was environment minister.

Finally, I think this deal really makes it inappropriate for May to be in the televised leaders debates. By only running 307 seats nationally one of the key arguments for the Greens no longer exists. They are not running candidates in every riding. Further with May acting as Liberal environment critic; it would be no less appropriate for May to join Dion, Layton and Harper than it would be to have John Baird join the leadership debates. The way things are going right now...I would be real surprised if both Dion and May survive as leaders past the next election. Following the momentum and excitement May had built following her London second place showing for the Greens, it is real disappointing what has happened with her since Dion won the Liberal leadership. Time to bring back Jim Harris!

Thanks for reading...


Darryl

Liberal nomination pool

[Photograph by: Rob Schuetze www.schuetze.ca]

Liberal Nomination Pool:

For those of who didn't get a chance to get involved in a hockey playoff pool here is potentially the next best thing. Now that Belinda has announced she would resign in the next election I have set the following odds for who is most likely to replace her...

• Appointed female candidate 1-1 (if it happens no democratic race)
• Tim Jones 2-1 (interested - former Aurora mayor)
• Chris Emanuel 2-1 (interested -newmarket councilor)
• Kyle Peterson 3-1 (considering - belinda's former campaign manager)
• John Taylor 6-1 (potentially considering - regional councilor Newmarket)
• Charles Beer 12-1 (former MPP)
• Belinda Stronach 12-1 (may change her mind)
• Karen Kraft Sloan 12-1 (former MP)
• Matt Haggerty 15-1 (Provincial president)
• Phyllis Morris: 15-1 (Aurora mayor)
• Bob Scott 20-1 (well connected in local politics)
• Tom Taylor 20-1 (former Newmarket mayor)
• Martha Hall Findlay 20-1 (Liberal candidate vs. Belinda, top female Liberal Party)
• Diane Springstein 20-1 (councilor and ran for mayor of Newmarket)
• Elizabeth May 25-1 (future Liberal environment minister and one of the few who believe in Dion)
• Jackie Playter 25-1 (community activist)
• Bill Chadwick 35-1 (current federal riding president)
• Someone outside the riding 80-1 (not including Martha Hall Findlay)
• Dorian Baxter 100-1 (Liberal based on most recent letters to the editor in Era Banner)
  

Based on the newspaper story today in the Era Banner it looks to me like Chris Emanuel and Tim Jones campaigns are quickly gaining steam and buzz. Kyle Peterson was considering provincial and may now look federal as well. Both Kyle Peterson and Chris Emanuel have nomination groups set up on Facebook. John Taylor is a long shot but would easily win if he enters the race due to membership sales. I would also expect at least one woman to get into the race. Of all these names, only Chris Emanuel and Tim Jones have publically expressed their interest in running federally against Lois Brown.

Darryl's prediction: Chris Emanuel due to his long term ties to the party and his relationship with local grass roots Liberals will replace Belinda by defeating Tim Jones. I think the vote will split between Newmarket Liberals and Aurora Liberals with Newmarket having more people. I think John Taylor would be the toughest to face of the front runners in a general election, but I would be very surprised if he gave up his regional seat to go federal or provincial at this time. Kyle Peterson will face Frank Klees on October 10 during the provincial election.

Are you a Liberal and disagree with my predictions or odds??? Did I leave someone off the list??? Being Conservative I obviously don't have any direct insights and this is all speculation. All are welcome to post their nomination comments under this post in the comment section.

News from Other Parties:

*The campaigns of Lois Brown (federal) and Frank Klees (provincial) are well underway for the Conservatives and Progressive Conservatives Party of Ontario.

*I predict Glenn Hubbers wins the nomination of the Green Party on April 21.

*With Belinda out of the race is Chudak willing to represent the NDP again???? Both federal and provincial nomination is completely up in the air for Team Orange as of this time.

*Will Dorian Baxter continue with the Progressive Canadian act that is starting to get old or will his true colours show leading him to run for the Liberals??? Twice he has written local articles praising Stephane Dion. During the 2006 debates he publicly endorsed Belinda Stronach on the stage. Having signs, an office and claiming to represent the "Progressive Conservative" party is simply dishonest and clearly misleading years after the merger. With the real Conservatives in government no one will be fooled.

There is never a dull moment in Newmarket-Aurora politics!

Thanks for reading and please feel free to comment!

Darryl

Belinda Stronach

Belinda Stronach:


The History

For anyone who enjoys politics, no riding has been as interesting as Newmarket-Aurora since the merger of the Progressive Conservative Party, Reform and Canadian Alliance Party. Following the merger, Belinda Stronach threw her hat in the race to run for leader of the new Conservative Party. Since that day there was never a dull moment here. First, Belinda had to face a nomination in Newmarket-Aurora. Lois Brown was already nominated as the Canadian Alliance candidate and stunned local Conservatives with her massive support that almost beat Belinda despite running for the leadership of a national party. Lois was a grass roots politician who had paid 25 years of dues to the community and the Conservative movement. Belinda was an international star with friends such as Bill Clinton, Mike Harris, Brian Mulroney, Bill Davis, Kofi Annan, Bono, and many other celebrities, athletes and world leaders. The Stronach family and Magna are very generous in the community and are also concerned with international causes as was shown with Katrina. Locally the Cancer Centre at Southlake, Magna Hoedown and a wide range of scholarships, grants and financial donations benefit this riding a great deal. Obviously Magna is a huge employer in York Region.

While in the Conservative Party, Belinda was campaigning as a moderate alternative to Stephen Harper focusing on gay marriage and abortion as top priority issues. Lois Brown stayed loyal to Stephen Harper and eventually became a national councilor. During the leadership race, Belinda showed her strengths that would ultimately later cut both ways. The media covered Belinda and gave her more coverage than almost any other politician besides the Prime Minister of the day. Her finances and connections allowed her to mount a credible campaign. Her star shot up immediately upon entry into public service but ultimately she lost to Harper's stronger grass roots campaign, experience and better grasp on policy at the time, despite spending the most money among candidates in the race. Stephen Harper had united the Canadian Alliance after a few left during the leadership of Stockwell Day. He was then able to make a deal with Peter MacKay and after a decade of wasting time in the wilderness of opposition with no chance of winning, suddenly the right was united. During the leadership race, news of the sponsorship scandal began to surface and suddenly Belinda Stronach, Tony Clement and Stephen Harper were being introduced at rallies as the next Prime Minister of Canada! A few months prior it seemed Paul Martin was going to be Canada's savior and threaten the very survival of Conservatism taking 200+ seats. After Harper won, speculation began about how long Belinda was willing to stay in politics. She promised to run in Newmarket-Aurora and under the leadership of Stephen Harper.

Usually in an election campaign a candidate runs on the party record and platform. When she ran as a Conservative and a Liberal, both times she found herself playing down the party and campaigning on the Stronach record in the community. At the doors Belinda Stronach would accept votes in support of Harper but would also emphasize her differences with his positions at other doors where there was negativity about the party or the leader. She wanted to be seen as a moderate and electable, but many within the party questioned if she was a real Conservative that would stand up to traditional principles. Her Liberal opponent at the time was Martha Hall Findlay. Martha parachuted into the riding with an impressive resume but absolutely no name recognition. She was a strong female candidate replacing incumbent Karen Kraft Sloan. In a roller coaster ride election night similar to Charest's own seat, Belinda ultimately won and started a career in Ottawa. Martha Hall Findlay moved into the riding and was ready for another shot following Martin's minority victory in 2004. Martha of course was asked to step down by Paul Martin only to become the top female in the party by entering the Liberal leadership as a complete unknown. In politics it is amazing how quickly things change literally over night.

As a member of parliament with the Conservative Party, Belinda became industry critic and was seen by some as the heir should Harper prove to be unelectable. On many occasions she undermined the leader of the party and was seen to be a constant rival. The media was focusing on her clothes, her relationship with Peter MacKay, her father, and the party she threw at the first Conservative policy convention. She constantly talked of unity and moderation at a time when the main story constantly in the media was relations between the Alliance and PC factions as well as the potential of Harper's leadership and ability to form a government. Harper wanted the sponsorship scandal to be the focus and was ready to vote down the budget and call an election immediately after the damaging testimony began to show up on TV everyday. Polls were not looking great for Conservatives, but a series of confidence votes were coming up. Prior to the budget, Conservatives were able to get a motion of non-confidence vote passed but the Liberals called it non-binding. Belinda voted non-confidence at the time on that motion one week before the budget. The Conservatives and BQ wanted to bring down the government immediately while the NDP had extorted Martin into major backroom concessions in exchange for their support. A desperate Paul Martin would beg the nation to wait for Gomery while using the government to strike deals with anyone who could buy him ten more minutes of power. Troops to Sudan were offered to Kilgour. Chuck Cadman would poll his constituents. Carolyn Parish was potentially going to be invited back into the Liberal caucus after stomping on a George Bush doll. Than came a dinner between David Peterson and Belinda Stronach that would change the dynamics of politics locally and I believe became the turning point for Conservative momentum nationally.

After The Floor Crossing:

Too much ambition? A lack of patience? Personality conflicts and a desire to get revenge on Harper? Sudden realization that she was a Liberal? Fear of losing her seat? Sick of tight party discipline? I am not sure what ultimately led Belinda to crossing the floor, but ultimately it was the beginning of the end of her political career. She either didn't factor in or was simply willing to accept the consequences of her actions. Conservatives heckled her constantly and columnists made several insulting remarks and cartoons; the media questioned her credibility and motives, going as far as laughing at her joint press conference with Paul Martin, several angry voters would later greet her at events and at the door; several Liberals who paid their dues in the backbenches were angry at Belinda gaining two cabinet positions from a desperate Paul Martin as a reward for crossing the floor. Conservatives who helped elect her to office, Peter MacKay, the voters, her colleagues and even her constituency office was not consulted while being given little or no notice at all. Belinda kept the minority Paul Martin government alive and supported a budget most people now don't remember the details of claiming it was good for Newmarket-Aurora. She said an election would strengthen the Bloc and she wasn't willing to line up with them to bring down the corrupt government. The Minister of democratic reform feared the Bloc would gain strength because more Quebec voters would support them due to Liberal weakness in Quebec and as a result increase their power. The deal stunk and I believe the anger in the Conservative party among MPs, volunteers and supporters all ready to fight an election nationally for the first time truly united and put the focus on governing. In many ways Belinda was a sign of division in the party. The result of her actions strengthened Harper and further tainted Martin nationally. Later in the year, Gomery would deliver his damning verdict on the Liberal Party and Belinda was forced to come back to Newmarket-Aurora and defend her floor crossing as well as the sponsorship and other scandals during the 2006 election. To her credit she faced the music, ran a strong campaign and was re-elected on her own personal popularity in the community despite the party she represented at the time.

As a Liberal it was quickly clear that Belinda had checked out. She was in opposition with the chances of a Conservative majority government drastically increasing. She was neutral in the leadership race and was shafted when Dion handed out critic roles to his rivals and not her. Leadership wasn't in the cards and I believe the Tie Domi media frenzy was the final straw. She didn't need the money, wanted time with her teenage kids, got sick of her personal life being in the media, was tired of all the security issues, wasn't being listened to or respected, saw Dion was going nowhere and felt her chances of being Liberal leader anytime in the future was simply not going to be in the cards. It simply wasn't worth it anymore and she bailed from the bad experience of politics and the constant media spotlight. Unfortunately many females leave politics with a bitter taste in their mouth such as Sheila Copps making it more difficult to recruit them into the democratic process. The Star says she may one day come back one day, but I doubt she really wants to. Her work at Magna will have far more of an impact on the economy and the community than anything she can accomplish in government at this point in time.

Having worked with her as a Conservative, I believe she is a genuine good person despite some bad political judgment playing the game Canadian democracy has become. I wish her nothing but the best on her international work like Spread the Net, her business career with Magna/Chrysler, and her family life that will hopefully benefit from far more privacy and security. The contribution the Stronach family and Magna have made to this riding are very much appreciated.

With potentially less than two weeks left before an election is called, Belinda becomes the 17th MP to not bother seeking re-election. Clearly there is very little confidence in the leadership of Stephane Dion among Liberals. Belinda is also the chair of the female caucus and was working on the Pink Book and recruiting the 1/3 female candidates Dion promised. Will Stephane Dion ignore the wishes of the Liberal grassroots riding association and undemocratically fulfill his quota or will the best candidate be allowed to represent the Liberal Party in Newmarket-Aurora. Will Belinda endorse a successor? Will she be active in the next campaign or simply begin to fade away from the political scene in Newmarket-Aurora. It will be interesting to see how the final chapter for the political career of Belinda Stronach comes to an end. The events of last week drastically change the scene for federal politics here in Newmarket-Aurora. The move could also affect plans provincially and at the town level as well as candidates begin to surface.

In the next election Belinda Stronach will no longer be a factor and who ever challenges Lois Brown in the general election is going to have to run on Dion's vision and the Liberal record. Voters will likely focus on leadership comparing Harper to Dion as oppose to other factors such as community donations, star power, and jobs in the community. The media won't be here and there won't be a national interest in the outcome anymore. With Peter Van Loan representing the riding as a Conservative next door and Frank Klees running here provincially, national party will surely see this as a priority riding with possible visits from Harper and senior ministers. As the Conservative Party gains in the polls at the expense of Dion nationally as well as in both Ontario and Quebec, it is quite possible that Newmarket-Aurora could be the breakthrough into the 905 and GTA sububuran areas that Mr. Harper needs to finally finish the dream of uniting the right and providing that majority government. Richmond Hill, Thornhill and Markham-Oakridges could also change colour. For local Conservative members, the record of Harper combined with the leadership of Dion and the absence of Belinda makes bridging 5000 votes a lot less difficult to overcome. I look forward to seeing if Newmarket-Aurora is a Liberal, Conservative or Swing riding after the upcoming election campaign.

Thanks for reading...

Darryl

Liberals angry at Dion's deal to help Greens

Liberals angry at Dion's deal to help Greens

ANDREW VAUGHAN / CP

Liberal Leader Stéphane Dion and Green Leader Elizabeth May announce their unusual pact not to run candidates in each other's ridings on April 13 at a press conference in New Glasgow, N.S.

Apr 14, 2007 02:30 AM

Allan Woods
Ottawa Bureau

OTTAWA – Federal Liberals admitted to a bad case of nerves yesterday after party leader Stéphane Dion broke with political tradition and vowed to help elect Green Leader Elizabeth May by not running a Liberal candidate in the Nova Scotia riding she plans to contest.

Dion and May announced an unprecedented pact whereby the Liberals will not run a candidate against the Green leader in Central Nova, the riding that Foreign Affairs Minister Peter MacKay has held since 1997. In turn, the Green Party, which has never had a seat in the House of Commons, will not run a candidate against Dion, who has held his Montreal riding of Saint-Laurent-Cartierville since 1996.

While senior Liberals said there was anger over the deal within the party, the two leaders said they were putting their shared concern about the environment ahead of politics. They issued a statement saying that a Dion-led government could work well on many issues with a May-led Green party.

"We're in a situation where I will fight for 307 Liberals plus Elizabeth May," the Grit leader said at a news conference yesterday in Stellarton, N.S. "It's really something exceptional for an exceptional lady."

May said her decision was driven, in part, by a fear that her party could end up dividing votes on the left and inadvertently help re-elect Prime Minister Stephen Harper.

"I do not, in other words, want to become Canada's Ralph Nader," she said, referring to the U.S. Green Party leader, who some say helped elect President George W. Bush in 2000 by stripping votes off Democratic candidate Al Gore.

The two party leaders were all smiles yesterday, and some senior Grits expressed support for Dion's "bold move." But the tight grins were poor disguise for the widespread concern that Canada's most successful political party was headed into uncharted territory.

"Amongst my colleagues, when it was first brought forward, the bands didn't start playing and we weren't ready to roll the meatballs and start the party," said Nova Scotia Liberal MP Rodger Cuzner (Cape Breton-Canso).

Cuzner said the party now risks losing some of the 10,000 people who voted Liberal in Central Nova in the last election, and possibly some party loyalists who are essential to running election campaigns.

A Liberal strategist, speaking on condition of anonymity, said there is widespread anger at the deal in caucus, which Liberals feel could be used against them in a federal election. The strategist said the decision was another strike against Dion, whose leadership has come into question in recent months.

"The only reason this was not the final straw is because of the threat of an election," the strategist said.

Ray Heard, former communications director to Liberal prime minister John Turner, was one of the few to publicly express his anger with Dion, saying he would support party members who believe Dion should be forced out.

The deal with May "denigrates the tradition that the Liberals are a national party," he said in an email to the Toronto Star.

"Both (Liberal MPs) Michael Ignatieff and Bob Rae are eminently qualified to succeed him before the next election and I cannot fault their supporters for plotting to dump him before it's too late."

MacKay did not comment yesterday.

A spokesperson said he was "meeting with constituents and looking after the issues important to Central Nova."

But Human Resources Minister Monte Solberg attacked the deal, questioning Dion's leadership ability.

"This decision reflects a terrible error in judgment ... but it's part of a pattern, and it further demonstrates that Stéphane Dion is not a leader," Solberg said.

NDP Leader Jack Layton, whose party came 3,273 votes shy of beating the Tories in the 2006 election, denounced the "backroom wheeling and dealing."

"You kind of expected this from Mr. Dion and the Liberals," he said. "But I have to say it is disappointing and somewhat surprising that Ms May, who professes to be someone who stands on principle, would have so quickly slipped into the muck ... denying people choices in an election."

Central Nova Liberal riding president Allan Armsworthy said he would give no advice to party loyalists who will find themselves without signs to post or doors to knock on when the next federal election rolls around. It will be up to each person to decide what they want to do and who they want to support.

"Some will probably be working for the Green Party as you'll probably see some former Conservatives and some former NDP working," he said.

Hargrove: Harper too Green

Green insanity looms: CAW

FILE PHOTO BY DAVID COOPER/TORONTO STAR

GM’s Oshawa truck plant yard will start filling with hybrid pickups from about mid-2008, the company announced Feb. 13.

Buzz Hargrove says manufacturing could suffer if environmental standards too tough

Apr 13, 2007 12:42 PM

Canadian Press

PORT ELGIN – The Canadian Auto Workers union targeted the federal Conservatives and the "insanity" of the environmental movement Friday as delegates talked strategy with an election ever looming and an Ontario provincial vote less than six months away.

Although historically linked with the New Democrats, union president Buzz Hargrove invited Ontario's Liberal Premier Dalton McGuinty to speak and saved his criticisms for Prime Minister Stephen Harper and environmentalists who want the auto sector targeted to fight climate change.

The upcoming elections are fuelling a lot of rhetoric as politicians try to "out green" one another, Hargrove said.

"Politicians are running with it now because Canadians are saying it's a key issue in the upcoming election and it just infuriates me," Hargrove said in a wide-ranging address to delegates.

"We stand to lose 150,000 jobs in our auto industry if the insanity of this environmental movement is allowed to continue."

Canada is only responsible for about two per cent of the world's total greenhouse gas production and shutting down the entire country would barely make an impact, Hargrove said.

Still, Hargrove said the union is supportive of the Kyoto Accord – as long as timetables are flexible enough for industries to meet them.

Hargrove said he was impressed by McGuinty's recent statement that the auto industry shouldn't necessarily phase out gas guzzlers like SUVs because, realistically, they're not going away.

The manufacturers should instead try to make the vehicles more fuel efficient and environmentally sound because there's big money to be made if those innovations are developed, McGuinty said.

"Going green isn't necessarily about going small," McGuinty told delegates Friday, adding he wants that technology to be made in Ontario.

"It will be good for jobs and good for the economy."

A move away from supporting the NDP has worked well for the union, considering McGuinty has been "a great supporter of issues that are important to our union," said Hargrove.

"We have to work with whoever's elected to try to get policy in the best interests of members families and communities ... and the premier's done an incredible amount," he said.

While a few delegates quietly booed when the premier's name was announced, during question and answer periods they chose to attack Harper for not support their industry.

Hargrove also said the union will consider employing strategic voting whenever the next federal vote is held in an attempt to avoid a Conservative majority government.

The union says the manufacturing sector produces 18 per cent of the country's overall economic activity, but almost 333,000 jobs have been lost in the last four years and there's no evidence the slide is coming to an end.

Onex, Magna eye bid for Chrysler

Onex, Magna eye bid for Chrysler

Schwartz, Stronach preparing all-Canadian offer for car maker

BOYD ERMAN AND GREG KEENAN

From Wednesday's Globe and Mail

Two of Canada's most aggressive and successful businessmen, Gerald Schwartz of Onex Corp. and Frank Stronach of Magna International Inc., are working on a joint bid for all of money-losing auto maker Chrysler, according to people familiar with the sale process.

The rationale behind a Magna-Onex partnership is that Magna could bring its expertise to operating auto factories, while Onex could use its financial finesse to run Chrysler's credit arm, the sources said.

Onex could also bring a labour-friendly private equity face to the table — many unionized workers made big gains in the company's recent purchase of an aerospace company — in a negotiation where making a deal with unions to cut costs will be key.

The price that Magna and Onex would pay is unclear, according to the sources, who requested that their names not be used, though there have been suggestions that seller DaimlerChrysler AG wants to generate at least $8-billion (U.S.) from a sale. Any buyer would also have to find a way to deal with the massive pension and health liabilities that Chrysler will come with, estimated at more than $15-billion.

Related to this article

Articles

• CAW chief vows to fight Kerkorian bid for Chrysler
• Kerkorian shakes up Chrysler race
• Excerpts from Tracinda letter
• Magna makes pitch for Chrysler alliance
• Daimler chairman confirms talks on sale of Chrysler

More company information

• Magna International
• Onex
• DaimlerChrysler

Follow this writer

• Add BOYD ERMAN AND GREG KEENAN to my e-mail alerts

Latest Comments

• These two Canadian super-companies could certainly run Chrysler...
• Rain SCM! are you serious?? VW stable...lol! google the words...
• This would be great....I'm so sick of foreign companies buying...
• Why not buy a stable European automaker, like VW or some other...
• 32 reader comments | Join the conversation

DaimlerChrysler put the unit up for sale amid shareholder discontent about the continuing losses since the $36-billion merger of Germany's Daimler and Detroit-based Chrysler in 1998.

Chrysler posted an operating loss of $1.5-billion last year after being sideswiped by a sudden and rapid rise in the price of gasoline, which sent sales of the company's pickup trucks and sport utility vehicles skidding.

The only offer that has been made public so far is a $4.5-billion cash offer from billionaire Kirk Kerkorian.

Investment bankers from JPMorgan Chase & Co. are running the sale process, and the sources said private equity firms Blackstone Group LP and Cerberus Capital Management LP are the other leading bidders.

Magna had also been rumoured to be working with a private equity partner, but the identity of the backer had not been revealed.

There had been speculation that Magna, one of the world's largest auto component makers, would not bid for the whole of Chrysler, but would rather aim for a partnership setup where the Canadian company would run plants and try to use its operational expertise to cut costs.

With Onex on side, a play for all of Chrysler becomes a possibility, the sources said. Onex has spent only about half of the $3.45-billion it raised in a private equity fund last year. Onex officials declined to comment on the possibility of a bid for Chrysler.

Magna could borrow as much as $7-billion to fund a bid, according to a recent report by Citigroup analyst Jon Rogers.

“Potential drivers for Magna's interest might include gaining more business from and solidifying its relationship with an important customer,” Mr. Rogers wrote.

Magna has refused to discuss its plans, other than via Mr. Stronach's public comments that Magna must get involved to protect its relationship with the auto maker, which generates about 15 per cent of Magna's annual revenue of $24.2-billion. Magna makes seats, trim parts, and suspension and engine components for virtually every Chrysler vehicle manufactured in North America, and actually builds cars for DaimlerChrysler at a plant in Austria.

A big hurdle will be making a deal with the auto maker's unions. The Canadian Auto Workers union and the United Auto Workers union have expressed their opposition to the sale of Chrysler.

They have also vocally criticized the prospect of a takeover of the company by private equity firms, because of concerns that a buyout firm will try to institute deep cost cuts.

CAW head Buzz Hargrove has met with Mr. Stronach to hear what the union leader called a “sketchy” outline of a Chrysler proposal.

In an interview yesterday, he reiterated that he prefers a sale to an industry player and he vowed to throw up obstacles to Mr. Kerkorian's bid.

“All I've done is send a message to folks that this is not going to be a cakewalk if people want to take our members' jobs,” Mr. Hargove said.

“He stands for everything that I'm opposed to,” Mr. Hargrove said of Mr. Kerkorian.

“He's made his money throwing a lot people out of work, made a lot of money for himself and a few executives at the expense of a lot of workers and their families over the years,” he added.

Onex, however, could point to the deal made with workers — many of whom belong to the UAW — at its Spirit AeroSystems unit.

Onex purchased Boeing Co.'s aircraft component plants in the U.S. Midwest, negotiated new labour agreements that cut the remaining workers in on gains in the value of the operation in return for wage and job reductions, then took the new company public as Spirit. Workers made out much better than anyone forecast — the average gain was expected to be about $30,000, but when shares in the IPO sold at a higher price than planned each worker ended up in line for about twice that much.

Mr. Hargrove and Mr. Schwartz also have a history of co-operation. In 1999, Mr. Hargrove backed Mr. Schwartz's failed bid to merge Air Canada and Canadian Airlines International Ltd.

Onex is no stranger to the auto parts business, either.

The firm had stakes during the 1990s in Automotive Industries Holding Inc. and Tower Automotive Inc. But Onex has at times run into trouble in the auto industry.

The company purchased J.L. French Automotive Castings in 1999, and invested $226-million (Canadian) in the company before it filed for bankruptcy protection during the downturn in the auto business.

Faceoff

A joint bid by Gerald Schwartz's Onex and Frank Stronach's Magna would pit two Canadian magnates against Tracinda Corp., led by Kirk Kerkorian, a billionaire investor from Beverly Hills. He has tabled a $4.5-billion (U.S.) bid for Chrysler. Also in the running are U.S. funds Blackstone Group and Cerberus Capital.

Kirk Kerkorian is a former pilot and amateur boxer who made his fortune building resorts in Las Vegas. He once held as much as 13 per cent of Chrysler Corp., before it was bought by Daimler for $38-billion (U.S.) in 1998. Last year, he owned as much as 10 per cent of General Motors.

Founded by Frank Stronach, Magna International makes car parts in Canada, Europe, Mexico, the United States and Britain.

Founded by Gerald Schwartz, Onex's subsidiaries make parts for planes and computers. They also build business jets and run health care facilities.

Belinda Stronach leaving politics for Magna

Belinda Not Running for Re-election:

Today it was made official that Belinda Stronach is returning to Magna International and will not be running in the next federal election. I will post my thoughts on this within the next 24 hours.

More to come...

-Darryl

**************************

Belinda Stronach leaving politics for Magna

Updated Wed. Apr. 11 2007 5:58 PM ET

CTV.ca News Staff

Belinda Stronach is leaving politics to return to her father's company, as Magna International Inc. considers a bid for troubled auto maker DaimlerChrysler AG.

"It's a critical time for the automotive industry here in Canada and globally, and it's a critical time for the company," the Liberal MP told CTV's Mike Duffy Live.

"The company is facing some major strategic decisions and growth, and I've decided that, at this stage, that's the best role I can play."

Stronach, 40, said she will remain with her party until the next election, when a new Liberal candidate will be chosen to run for her Ontario riding of Newmarket-Aurora.

Several Liberals have chosen not to seek re-election, including former cabinet minister Bill Graham. Stronach emphasized that her decision had nothing to do with Stephane Dion's leadership of the party.

"Absolutely not. It's very simply: this is more about my responsibility to my family and the family business," she said.

"Magna is a huge employer in Newmarket-Aurora and Canada, and I think I can make a greater contribution there at this time.

"I'm one of the few who has served under both leaders -- under Stephen Harper when he was leader of the Opposition, and under Stephane Dion. I can tell you, I think Stephane Dion is the best person to lead this country."

Stronach is expected to serve as executive vice-chair of Magna, one of the top auto parts manufacturers. Her father, Frank Stronach, is Magna's founder and chairman.

CTV's Ottawa bureau chief Robert Fife said he was not surprised by Stronach's decision, noting that she appeared to have become unhappy with her political role.

"She did not have a high-profile critic's role and she had not been prominent in asking questions in question period after Mr. Dion took over," Fife said.

Most recently, Stronach had been serving as Opposition critic for Competitiveness and the New Economy.

Stronach formally entered politics by running for the Conservatives in January 2004. Before then, she was credited with helping to create the Conservative Party, by urging the leaders of the Reform and Progressive Conservatives to unite.

A little more that a year later, in May 2005, Stronach crossed the floor in favour of the Liberals just before a crucial budget vote that could have toppled the Liberals.

Under the leadership of then-prime minister Paul Martin, she became Minister of Human Resources and Skills Development, as well as Minister responsible for Democratic Renewal and Minister responsible for Service Canada.

Stronach's personal life came under the spotlight at the time of her defection, with her public breakup with Conservative MP Peter MacKay.

Stronach later was linked to former Toronto Maple Leaf Tie Domi as the alleged "other woman" in Domi's acrimonious divorce.

In October 2006, MacKay was accused of referring to Stronach as a "dog" during a heated exchange in the House of Commons.

MacKay denied making the comment. After an investigation, House Speaker Peter Milliken said he could find no evidence of the remark and therefore a formal apology was not needed.

"I think she was certainly a political celebrity," Conservative strategist Tim Powers told CTV Newsnet.

Stronach's political mentor, former Ontario premier David Peterson, said the media became obsessed with her personal life, which could be problematic.

"Look, good-looking women get more attention than they probably deserve. But they also get more criticism than they probably deserve," he told The Canadian Press.

"The bad part is everybody's got an opinion on your hair colour and who you're going out with."

Habitat for Humanity in Newmarket

Habitat for Humanity in Newmarket:


Habitat for Humanity is doing a build in Newmarket this June. This organization offers the opportunity for people in York Region to take a hands on approach in breaking the cycle of poverty for residents within our community. I would encourage everyone who has the spare time to get involved in this great cause. For more information on Habitat for Humanity in York Region, please visit the link below:

http://www.hfhyr.ca


-Darryl

******************


About Habitat for Humanity York Region:

http://www.hfhyr.ca

Habitat for Humanity Canada is a national, non-profit, faith-based organization working for a world where everyone has a safe and decent place to live. Our mission is to mobilize volunteers and community partners in building affordable housing and promoting homeownership as a means to breaking the cycle of poverty. The organization was founded in 1985, consists of 30,000 volunteers and 71 Affiliate organizations from coast to coast,

and is a member of Habitat for Humanity International which spans 100 countries, has built over 200,000 homes, and is now building a new home every 24 minutes.

Habitat for Humanity York Region Video:

http://www.hfhyr.ca/docs/hfhyr.wmv


Habitat for Humanity Canada:



Habitat for Humanity in New Orleans:




Jimmy Carter 2006 Project in India:

Most support elected judiciary, poll finds

Most support elected judiciary, poll finds

Updated Mon. Apr. 9 2007 7:52 AM ET

CTV.ca News Staff

Nearly two-thirds of Canadians back the idea of electing judges, according to a new poll.

Sixty-three per cent of 1,000 Canadians questioned by pollster Strategic Counsel for CTV News and The Globe and Mail supported the notion of elected judges.

In contrast, 30 per cent opposed the idea.

Of the survey respondents, 11 per cent strongly opposed an elected judiciary, but 24 per cent strongly backed the idea.

The province of Quebec saw the strongest support for the notion with 67 per cent backing an elected judiciary.

The poll also found that 53 per cent said the Charter has had a positive, or very positive, impact on Canada over the past 25 years.

Meanwhile 12 per cent said it had a negative impact and 25 per cent said the impact has been neutral.

The federal Conservatives have stopped short of calling for an elected judiciary.

"That's just not our tradition," former federal justice minister Vic Toews said last year.

"I actually think our system is pretty good. It just needs to be fixed."

Concern over religious freedom

The poll found the majority of respondents in Quebec were concerned about potential court rulings on religious freedom, which is protected under the Charter.

Of those polled in the province, 56 per cent expressed apprehension these cases could result in the pursuit of religious practices against Canadian values. In contrast, 29 per cent said the same in the rest of the country.

The question they were asked stated: "The Charter does guarantee freedom of religion. Looking ahead, some are concerned that this might lead to abuses where some groups use this guarantee to pursue religious practices that are against Canadian values. Others disagree and say that the guarantee of religious freedom is a fundamental right that must be protected in all instances. Which best represents your view?"

The debate over reasonable accommodation has heated up in Quebec in recent weeks.

Sondos Abdelatif, 19, was given the ultimatum to withdraw from a corrections training session at a Montreal jail or remove her headscarf last month.

In February, an 11-year-old Ottawa girl was ejected from a soccer game in Quebec after she refused to remove her headscarf during the game. The incident garnered international attention after soccer's governing body, FIFA, upheld the ban on headscarves.

Furthermore, the small town of Herouxville drew international attention when it adopted a declaration of "norms" that outlines how immigrants must fit in.

The poll also found 73 per cent of survey respondents back the idea of having the right to own and protect property enshrined in the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

Meanwhile, 15 per cent rejected the notion of putting property rights in the Charter.

The most support was seen in Western Canada, where 31 per cent backed the idea.

The weakest support was in Quebec, where 14 per cent endorsed the proposition.

The poll has a margin of error of 3.1 per cent, slightly higher for provincial and regional figures.