FROLITICKS

Satirical commentary on Canadian and American current political issues

Jul 31

Stephen Harper – the George W. Bush of the North!

by bcurry

OK. We have the Prime Minister of Canada, Stephen Harper, reiterating his government’s hard line on Hamas in Gaza, Russia’s involvement in Ukraine and Chinese cyberattacks on Canadian government computers. Now, no one would blame any Western leader for expressing his or her government’s position with respect to foreign policy. However, if one is going to continuously take such forceful stances in opposition, then you better have the force and accompanying strength to back up your tough words. Such is not the case for Canada.

Unlike some other countries directly affected by recent regional events, Canada has little to loose in taking such a hard line stance. Canada’s dealings with Russia and the Middle East are minimal when compared to the U.S. and the Europeans. Cyberattacks by China and other countries are not all that unusual and more common then we think. Just think of the American spying on many of its own allies, most notably Germany. Maybe Canadian authorities and security agencies aren’t all that innocent as well.

So what does Canada have to back up its harsh words? The military, while very professional and dedicated, is among the smallest in the West in absolute numbers. The military is also dealing with aging and inadequate equipment in all its services, and is totally reliant on NATO to service most missions abroad. The Canadian economy is very reliant on external trade, especially for markets of the country’s natural resources — with 70% of trade still being carried out with the U.S. All said and done, Canada can huff and puff all it wants, but it won’t blow anyone’s house down.

Unless Mr. Harper plans to do standup comedy at Yuk Yuks in Moscow, Beijing or Tel Aviv, he and Foreign Minister John Baird might want to tone down the rhetoric somewhat. Let’s not make Canada’s international reputation suffer any more than it already has. Once, Canada was viewed as a moderate voice on the world scene, ready and trusted to help bring conflicting parties to the table. Canada has lost its non-alignment status which served it so well during the Cold War and past world conflicts. Now it appears that Mr. Harper would like to become the George W. Bush of the North! Needless-to-say, this is no laughing matter.

Canada Foreign Policy Foreign Policy

Leave a comment »
Jul 7

Why Are We Acting To Refugees In Such A Belligerent Way?

by bcurry

In recent months, we have seen in both Canada and the U.S. belligerent reactions directed at refugees. In the U.S., some American politicians and citizens have lambasted the Obama administration over the influx of Central American illegal refugees, especially children, across their southern border. White House officials have insisted that extreme poverty and an epidemic of gang violence in certain Central American countries were the main causes of the unanticipated spike in illegal migration. Meanwhile, in Canada, the Supreme Court ruled that recent federal policies to limit the kinds of medical care that refugees would be entitled to were overly cruel and unusual treatment. Indeed, such policies are contrary to Canada’s Charter of Rights. However, recent polls have shown that Canadians, like many Americans, appear to support the tightening up of rules governing the treatment and deportation of illegal refugees.

Whatever happened to the fundamental edict opening our borders up to those persecuted, the ill and the impoverished? Have our values as nations changed that much? Both countries were built on the sweat and hard work of immigrants, including refugees escaping all forms of persecution in other countries and seeking to better their lives and that of their children. Just as a nation is judged by how well it cares for those citizens requiring assistance and the less fortunate, it must also be judged on how it treats outsiders seeking refuge within its borders. The fact that the state may view their entry as legal or illegal does not matter. These refugees are desperate, often taking enormous personal risks to travel to our countries.

The very definition of a refugee is a person who has been forced to leave their country in order to escape war, persecution or natural disaster. Today, one can further add conditions attributed to poor economies, drug cartel violence, extreme poverty, lack of affordable medical care, etc. As two of the wealthiest countries in the world, it is only natural that persons would seek refuge in the U.S. and Canada. Until conditions improve in their native countries, the constant influx of refugees, legal or otherwise, will only continue. Simply deporting desperate people and their families is surely not the only answer. Instead of knee jerk reactions, both countries should look at new and more effective internal and external policies to accommodate the needs of these less fortunate.

I know that the majority of Canadians and Americans are much more humane and caring than any polling would show. As societies, we both share similar values when it comes to fairness, equality and openness. Hopefully, we can be more understanding and better demonstrate our humanity by opening our hearts and resources to those who are less fortunate. I know that I will.

Canada US

Leave a comment »
Jun 9

Are Our Cities Becoming War Zones?

by bcurry

A team of camouflaged and masked men, armed with M-16 rifles, grenade launchers, silencers and more, briskly enter a building. In front sits a 9-foot tall armoured and mine-resistant combat vehicle, ready to charge in on a second’s notice. Is this a scene from a military onslaught in some Afghan village? No. This is actually a police SWAT team entering the premises containing alleged illegal activity.

In both the U.S. and Canada, the number of heavily-armed SWAT teams has skyrocketed since the 1980s. Police departments are arguing that they have no choice but to be better armed to stay in step with the criminals who are arming themselves more heavily every day. This despite the fact that, today, crime has fallen to its lowest levels in a generation. The drug gang wars have wound down, and despite current fears, the number of domestic terrorist attacks has declined sharply from the 1960s and 1970s.

What is more worrisome is that SWAT teams are increasingly being employed for what once were routine police activities, such as domestic disputes and liquour inspections. In addition, local departments are choosing to employ armed officers and equipment more frequently in order to justify any impact on their budgets. More and more, recruiting material and videos are fixated on clips of officers storming into homes with smoke grenades and firing automatic weapons. Is this really the image of policing that one wants to convey to potential new recruits?

In Canada, SWAT teams are found mainly in larger cities and among federal and provincial agencies. However, in the U.S., they can even be found in towns with fewer than 25,000 people. This is primarily because of the federal military-transfer program started in the early 1990s. The program makes free surplus military equipment available to municipalities which they could not otherwise afford. Even some local police chiefs are questioning the need for such heavy-duty equipment, noting the negative impact it very likely has on the department’s image and relationship with the public.

Unfortunately, recent shooting events surrounding tragic police fatalities in both the U.S. and Canada have again naturally raised the issue over the safety of police officers. Yet, I think it highly unlikely that police chiefs would want to have their officers regularly patrolling in armoured vehicles through their neighbourhoods. SWAT teams have a legitimate purpose to serve, but not at the expense of the local beat cop. After all, with all due respect, we’re hopefully not living in war zones!

Canada US

Leave a comment »
Jun 3

Coal, Oil and Gas Are All Very Nice, But ……

by bcurry

Well, it looks like we’ve got a conundrum. On the one hand, everyone is increasingly concerned about climate change, while on the other hand cheap sources of coal, oil and natural gas keep popping up. However, while a hearty supply of coal, oil and natural gas provides cheap energy sources for now, eventually even these sources will become depleted. And then what? By the looks of it, certainly not renewable energy sources! What about seriously dealing with the ongoing impact of fossil fuel usage on the climate?

North Americans aren’t the only ones in this boat. Europeans, the Chinese, the Indians, and the rest of the developed world are rowing to the same tune. Much of the prognosis is being attributed to new technologies in drilling, in particular the recovery of shale oil and gas through a contentious process called “fracking”. In addition, new pipelines are expected to pop up all over the world, including those planned for between Russia and China and the U.S. and Canada. Liquefied natural gas (LNG) facilities are also expected to expand in the U.S. and Canada in order to export natural gas to Asia and Europe. But at what environmental risks?

Oil and gas extraction and production is responsible for about a third of all carbon emissions, while the combustion engine releases about another third of pollutants. Alas, by 2030 the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) wants to cut power plant emissions by 30 percent from 2005 levels. The EPA is particularly going after power plants, notably those electrical generation operations powered by coal — coal still producing almost 40 percent of electricity generation in the U.S. The new EPA proposal, if approved, will most likely force power plants to switch to natural gas or to seek out renewable or nuclear energy resources. Remember, the U.S. is currently the second largest contributor to global warming on the planet.

As for Canada, Environment Canada predicts that the country will fail to meet its greenhouse gas emissions reduction target of 17 percent below 2005 levels by 2020, primarily because of the oilsands projects whose emissions are expected to triple. Regulations on Canada’s largest oil and gas emitters have yet to be released, seven years after they were first discussed. The federal government talks a good talk, but has failed to walk the walk.

The problem is that President Obama has to convince the states and the fossil fuel industry to reduce carbon emissions in line with national targets. Despite states such as Missouri and Illinois for example which continue to produce at least 80 percent of their electricity from coal. Prime Minister Stephen Harper believes that Canada doesn’t get enough credit given how hard it is to cut emissions from a system where much of the energy is already clean — namely hydroelectric power. The PM completely ignores the predicted increases in greenhouse gas emissions from the oilsands and the potential environmental issues surrounding the expansion of pipelines to carry oilsands crude oil across Canada and into the U.S. Between Obama and Harper, when it comes to urgently dealing with fossil fuels, one gets a feeling of witnessing — excuse the expression — the blind leading the blind.

Canada Coal Keystone XL Oil and Gas Oil and Gas Transport of Oil US

Leave a comment »
May 9

When It Comes to the Public Service – Politicians Always Look to the Easy Answers

by bcurry

Well, here we go again. In both Canada and the U.S., certain political factions are continuing to treat public servants as “costs” rather than as “assets”. They believe that all one has to do to get deficits under control and to balance budgets is cut public service jobs and freeze public servants’ wages. Even better, let’s just make the public service operate more like private corporations — a crazy notion that I previously had blogged on.

However, the fact of the matter is that many of government’s human resource problems have arisen from changes in the nature of the public sector workforces and a lack of political will. While clerical jobs once dominated the bureaucracy, professional occupations do today. Governments need to recruit and keep employees to fill those posts. Current job classification systems prevent agencies from aligning compensation with what comparable occupations in the private sector pay, undermining government’s ability to attract top performers. Political motivated attacks on the public service only help to increase what have already become stressful working conditions. This in turn has increased concerns over the mental health of senior managers and public sector employees, and subsequent lost of productivity.

Cuts in operating budgets of various departments/agencies often lead to program and service delivery becoming “dysfunctional”, no longer able to effectively serve their respective clients. Since this primarily is a consequence of token cuts, one has to ask oneself why a government would continue to support the existence of reduced programs and services. Maybe it’s time that politicians bite the bullet and make some hard choices. Governments need to do their evaluations and eliminate programs and services that they believe are no longer essential. There will no doubt be an outcry by affected interest groups, including unions, and various supporters of such programs. However, governments will just have to have the political will and stamina to face such opposition, something that hasn’t been too much in evidence in the past.

Moreover, governments will no longer be asking public servants to do more with less and to undertake the near impossible. While such program elimination will result in a “leaner and meaner” public service, it will also lead to ensuring adequate resources and support are provided to ensure the effectiveness of the essential programs and services. After all, is it not the role of government to make the hard choices? Once done, politicians must stop simply attacking public servants, get on with modernizing the public service to meet its future challenges, reduce unnecessary contracting out of services, and improve government’s ability to attract top performers.

Canada Federal Government Federal Government Public Service Public Service US

Leave a comment »
Apr 24

American Gun Culture Gone Amok!

by bcurry

Lucille, get my Magnum 45 because I’m moving to Georgia. Low and behold, that state’s Governor just signed into law the possibility of every gun owner carrying a weapon into a church, bars and government buildings under certain conditions. Schools will also be authorized now to allow staff members to carry weapons on campus. All this because advocates believe that it will protect the constitutional right to bear arms. So much for Georgia peach and friendly Southern hospitality!

Hey, I can even carry a gun to an airport out there. If discovered when going through security, as long as I have a valid gun permit, I simply would get slapped on the wrist and sent home. What more can a law-abiding gun owner hope for?

Despite the evident on-going gun violence in the U.S., more states have been introducing more lax gun legislation, especially those that are Republican controlled. Here in Canada, both the number of victims and the rate of firearm-related violent crime fell by more than one-quarter between 2009 and 2012. This represented a rate of 21 victims per 100,000 population in 2012. The rate of firearm-related homicide in Canada was reported to be 0.49 per 100,000 population in 2012, which was seven times lower than that of the United States at 3.5 per 100,000 population in 2012.

On the one hand, you have American police representatives expressing grave concerns over having citizens carrying guns out in the open. Then there are those on the other hand, including the gun lobbyists, who appear to believe that arming everyone will make them safer from attacks by the so-called “bad guys”. One can only hope that bystanders don’t get caught in the crossfire. Having guns allowed in bars or restaurants reminds me of the old Wild West mentality. Unfortunately, we’re supposed to be living in a modern age. At least, I hope we are!

Gun Control US

Leave a comment »
Apr 15

Why Performance Pay Doesn’t Work in the Public Service

by bcurry

Recently, both federal administrations in Canada and the U.S. have reintroduced plans to implement merit-based pay systems in the public service. Every few years, discussions about the introduction of a more performance-based pay system for public servants surface. This year is no different. From past experiences the problem is that, for the non-executive groups in particular, the implementation of such pay systems doesn’t work very well — if at all!

In the U.S., the Partnership for Public Service has proposed a plan to introduce a federal pay system that would compensate workers at a level on par with their cohorts in the private sector, with extra pay for only those who perform above expectations. Federal-worker unions have opposed the plan, saying the current pay system has served the nation well. The government has experimented with pay-for-performance programs in the past, particularly with the Defense Department’s National Security Personnel System, which Congress canceled in 2009. According to unions and other federal-worker groups, that program failed in part because employees did not trust that it would work fairly.

In Canada, the federal Treasury Board, which oversees pay structures for federal departments, recently introduced pay-for-performance programs for the non-executive categories of public servants. However, federal unions are challenging the Conservative government’s new performance management regime, touted as a “new beginning”. The government claims it will make Canada’s public servants more productive and efficient while weeding out poor performers. The Professional Institute of the Public Service of Canada has filed a policy grievance on behalf of 17 unions against key provisions of employees’ new mandatory performance agreements, saying these violate collective agreements. The unions are also concerned that the performance appraisal approach is unfair, biased and flawed, often depending on the personal relationship between managers and departmental staff.

Proposing performance-based compensation systems to bring the public sector into line with private sector approaches is like comparing eggs and apples. So much of what the public service does is in immediate response to the policies and politics of the government of the day. This more-or-less precludes any reference to a genuine “bottom line” when assessing results and achievements in meeting organizational objectives. This leaves managers with a need to simply assess employees’ contributions to meeting daily operational activities and their ability to effectively adjust to the whims of one’s political masters. Even measuring short-term efficiencies can be tricky, if not impossible, under such circumstances. Measuring long-term effectiveness is even more difficult given the ever present winds of political change.

Setting up a valid and legitimate merit-based appraisal system is the first and foremost ingredient for any potential success. Ensuring that managers are adequately trained in order to respect and maintain such a system on a continuing basis is the next most important requirement. Finally, the system’s development and implementation has to involve consultations with those employees who are directly affected, otherwise there can be no employee buy-in. Without these three key elements, any performance-based approach will result in an inequitable and fraudulent compensation system. What the stressed-out pubic service doesn’t need right now is another claim to disrepute!

Canada Federal Government Federal Government Public Service Public Service US

Leave a comment »
Feb 27

What’s Going On With All That Snail Mail?

by bcurry

Well, it looks as if the time has come once again to replace the horse and buggy with the horseless carriage. Yes, what we’re talking about is the ongoing debate over the viability of postal services in Canada and the U.S. Both postal services are loosing significant amounts of money with so-called ‘snail mail’, and need to reduce their costs and increase revenue sources. They are billions of dollars in the red, and the federal governments apparently are not interested in intervening to save their butts. Governments claim that they have enough on their plates with current deficits and the ubiquitous desire to balance their books.

In Canada, over the next five years Canada Post is planning to cut door-to-door delivery where it currently exists in favour of the use of more community postal boxes. In addition, there will be about 8,000 fewer postal positions by the end of this period. In the U.S., talks have evolved around discontinuing Saturday postal deliveries and reducing the number of outlets in communities. Of course, the cost of postage stamps keeps climbing in both countries!

The removal of direct postal delivery has raised the ire of some citizens, although community postal boxes have been around for some time now. It is argued that seniors and persons with disabilities will find it especially difficult to get to such boxes to pick up their mail. Indeed, for many seniors and persons with disabilities the loss of mail delivery is a major concern, particularly as these persons most likely rely heavily on this service. Given this winter’s severe weather, I can certainly understand their reluctance or inability to leave their homes. Some kind of alternative ways of picking up their mail will have to be worked out, either through volunteers or other subsidized means.

Let’s face it, in some communities the postal service is the most direct way in which the federal government communicates with its citizens. Not everyone has access to the Internet, can afford it or wishes to have access to it. For this reason, politicians are going to have to deal with these issues. Already, municipalities, local community bodies, businesses and charities are expressing their concerns over what impact the reduction in regular door-to-door mail delivery will have on them. Up until now, the debate has narrowly centered on the bottom line of the postal service and how to improve competition with private delivery services.

However, now is the time for a much broader and in-depth discussion as to the consequences of such policies for our citizens, especially at the community level. Such decisions are far too important as to not include much more debate at the federal political level. As an essential national service, there still is a need to explore all possible alternatives. In turn, the rationale for any resulting policies must then be clearly explained to everyone’s satisfaction. Otherwise, there could be the danger of a citizen revolt and countless actions against the postal services. It may be snail mail, but its delivery is still important to many individuals and communities through rain, snow, wind or hail.

Canada Federal Government Federal Government US

Leave a comment »
Feb 6

Keystone XL – Pipe Dream or Nightmare for Canadian and American Politicians

by bcurry

Well, it appears that the proposal for the Keystone XL pipeline has finally passed at least one of its biggest hurdles. In its Final Environmental Impact Statement, the U.S. Department of State concluded that completing the pipeline’s northern leg would not have a major impact on global greenhouse gas emissions. Yet, this statement still doesn’t guarantee that the pipeline, facilitating the north-south movement of Canadian heavy crude over 4,000 miles across North America, will receive final approval from Washington. As events have shown, there has been a fundamental confusion in the Obama administration’s policy approach to Keystone from the very beginning. Given environmentalists’ opposition and some emerging legal challenges, President Obama may yet choose to take his merry time to decide on whether to allow the pipeline’s construction.

One thing is for sure, whether the Keystone XL pipeline is built or not, the development of the Alberta “oilsands” will continue. Too much has been invested to date to stop the flow and transport of its so-called dirty heavy crude. Indeed, North American railroads have been taking up a good deal of the slack, much to the dismay of communities located along their tracks and a real fear of future derailments of oil-hauling trains. The cry of “remember Lac Megantic” goes up and rightly so.

In addition, the Americans don’t appear to be in any hurry to bless such endeavours given the vast amounts of oil now coming out of American ground. The U.S. has become fairly energy self-sufficient in oil and natural gas supplies due to “fracking” technologies. Indeed, record U.S. oil production, which rose by 992,000 barrels per day in 2013, more than cancels out the amount of oilsands bitumen that the pipeline would transport to Texas Gulf Coast refineries. However, experts estimate that within the next 15 years the U.S. will still have to import about 30% of its daily oil requirements. This compares to only a few years ago when Americans were looking at importing 70% of their needs. Having ready access to Canadian heavy crude oil could provide one distinct advantage with respect to ensuring American national security. If all of that 30% were to come from Canada, future “energy independence” would most likely encompass an entire continent. No more need to rely on Arab oil imports.

However, Prime Minister Stephen Harper and his government have dropped the ball on this file. Refusing to take “no” for an answer, the PM even gave hints of a threat to divert the heavy crude to China via a new pipeline to the Pacific coast. The mighty Chinese already have a very small but important stake in oilsands development. Sorry, but trying to bully the American President into quickly approving such a project is probably not a good strategy! Demonstrating that the Canadian and Albertan governments are really serious about dealing with the problem of carbon pollution may have been more advantageous and useful. Furthermore, TransCanada and the other pipeline companies will have to better demonstrate their capacity to minimize any environmental and economic damage from potential pipeline leaks — and inevitably there will be more such leaks.

In the meantime, numerous American industry associations and environmentalists continue to battle it out to convince the Obama administration and Congress as to the merit of their respective positions. All the Canadian administration can do is sit awkwardly on the sidelines, patiently wait and see what will happen. Who knows, Canada’s pipe dream scenario may yet become its worst nightmare!

Keystone XL Transport of Oil

Leave a comment »
Jan 20

New Year and Crazy Politics to Look Forward To

by bcurry

Well. A new year has arrived and with it the certainty that politicians in the U.S. and Canada will provide us with plenty of entertainment — no matter how painful. Once again, one is starting off the year with new scandals, thanks largely to Republican Governor Chris Christie of New Jersey and what is now being called “Bridgegate”. Apparently, four days of George Washington Bridge delays in September were allegedly caused on purpose by Governor Christie’s office in order to punish a local Democratic Party mayor. In addition, questions are being raised about how the good Governor had directed some of the federal recovery funds in aid of the victims and extensive damage resulting from Superstorm Sandy. New Jersey Lt.-Gov. Kim Guadagno strongly denied that Christie’s administration had tied Superstorm Sandy recovery funds to support for a prime real estate project in Hoboken. However, Hoboken Mayor Dawn Zimmer ratcheted up her allegation about the funding link and apparently has turned over documents to a federal prosecutor investigating his staff. Remember, Governor Christie was expected to be a strong contender for the Republican presidential nomination for 2015. Maybe not so much anymore?

Here in Canada, Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s government is still going to have to deal with a number of Senate spending scandals — some of which are currently under investigation by the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP). With federal elections coming up in October 2015, it will be very interesting to see just how long it will take for the RCMP to proceed with any potential criminal charges? In the meantime, the current government’s standing in the polls is going down. It appears that Liberal leader Justin Trudeau has been making headway with average Canadian voters, despite his apparent inexperience and having misspoken a number of times. Given the Liberal Party’s position in support of the legalization of marijuana (alias pot, Weed, reaper, Mary Jane, food, ganja, kush), I’d certainly vote for his party! Think of all the revenue one could raise. It may even help some people cope better with what’s going on!

Then we have President Obama telling us how we all need “Big Brother” to oversee your interests, whatever those may be. If the American spy agency is reading this, please note that I love spy movies. As your neighbour, I love Americans and would never walk on your manicured lawns without your permission and for fear of being shot. Carry on Mr. President and please let us know how it all works out in the name of national security.

I can’t wait to see what the coming year has in store for us. More of the same I trust. Meanwhile, keep smiling and enjoy the rollercoaster ride. Happy New Year!!!!!

Canada Federal Government Justin Trudeau Political Scandals Political Scandals US

Leave a comment »
«Older Entries
Newer Entries »
Blog at WordPress.com.