Strong and Free

Here we go again

2005-11-30T15:55:00.000-08:00

Here we are at Day Two of one of the longest writ periods in Canada's history. So far, so good.

There has been a lot of quack about having a Christmas election. This not a Christmas election. It is a winter election with a break in the middle. Anyone who is playing the Christmas "card" is looking for an excuse to be angry. Folks, this is Canada; we have winter; we are Canadians; we can handle it.

Election day is almost a full month after Christmas. That should give everyone lots of time to finish the last turkey casserole and turn a thought or two to the future of Canada.

The people inconvenienced by the timing of the election are candidates, volunteers and Elections Canada personnel. Others are free to ignore it, except on January 23rd. On that day, it would be really dandy if citizens could exercise what that word means and take the thirty minutes required to participate in their own futures.

When sixty percent of Iraqis turn out in January 2005, under threat of death: and sixty percent of Canadians turn out in June 2004, under threat of sunburn, you have to ask yourself what is wrong with this picture.

Canadians profess to love democracy, but two out of every five eligible to participate in the most fundamental way, simply can't be bothered. Disenchantment with the political process and many of its practitioners is understandable. I'm sorry, but apathy is not.

There are hundreds of candidates for all parties who have made an enormous personal commitment. Regardless of party and politics, all of them deserve credit.

There are many thousands of volunteers dedicating many hundreds of thousands of hours to participate and to promote their favourite. Regardless of party and politics, all of them deserve credit.

I've met a lot of apathy at the tens of thousands of doors I have visited over the past two-and-a-half years; and I occasionally get very direct in my advice to them. The odd one gets a little angry at me for that; but if it makes them angry enough to get off the couch and vote for anyone, that's okay.

I could give you my Conservative answer about who caused the election, but it's frankly irrelevant, at this point. The fact is that we are in an election and it is every Canadian's duty to vote. While I obviously crack myself up, I'd sure like us to not let a Canadian winter and apathy be bigger deterrents to voting than death.

Airplanes and elections

2005-11-23T21:36:00.000-08:00

Tuesday, Defence Minister Bill Graham, flanked by Chief of the Defence Staff General Rick Hillier and Public Works Minister Scott Brison, announced an accelerated program to replace the oldest of our C-130 Hercules fleet. It’s about bloody time!

Mr. Graham seemed to express frustration at being forced into this scenario by the threat of an election. Is that what it takes – the threat of losing his job to make him and his colleagues do the right thing? If so, then good on the Opposition parties for making something happen.

The truth is that there was nothing stopping the Government from going ahead, other than political gamesmanship and chronic defence underfunding. They're not sure whether they are afraid of being criticized for foolishly committing money with an election in the air; or whether they want to try to look like belated heroes to a Canadian Forces that they have shamefully neglected for decades.

As an airman who is deeply concerned about the critical degradation of the CF's capabilities over the decades, I am glad that something has been done. Most of the C-130 fleet is on its butt and that is severely restricting the Air Force from fulfilling its operational commitments.

The Air Force needs new aircraft right now. They have expressed their preferred solution for the tactical airlift part of the equation through General Hillier. That is an important step, but we still have to address our continuing shortfall of strategic airlift. Canada has never had strategic airlift capability; that is, the ability to carry a significant amount of personnel and equipment over a significant distance. The Canadair Yukon, Boeing 707 and now the Airbus CC150 did a pretty good job of moving personnel over a long distance, but couldn't carry much in the way of equipment.

Some are questioning the projected high cost of the new aircraft, but that is somewhat misunderstood. I'm basing my comments on being intimately familiar with the New Fighter Aircraft Program (CF-18). Program cost includes life cycle costs; which comprises many things. These may include operations and maintenance, spares, support equipment, test equipment, documentation (in both official languages), training (flying, simulators, technicians, logistics), and infrastructure.

It also includes things like GST and revenue dependency for PWGSC to administer the program. With the CF-18, we had to pay GST on every aircraft that was delivered to Canada and was not re-deployed to Germany. In those days, PWGSC was Supply and Services Canada and, as I recall, we paid them 1.5% of the program cost to administer it. So, if numbers are similar today, take about 8.5% right off the top of program money. Your security and defence is just another source of over-taxation in Government eyes.

The CF-18 program was about CAD 5 billion for 138 aircraft. The contract cost of each individual aircraft was just over USD 16 million in January 1978 dollars. Simply dividing the total program cost by the number of aircraft is misleading. I'm not sure whether we are or are not paying a fair price for the proposed new aircraft, but people should understand all aspects before they criticize.

The other issue is the urgency of signing a contract. The Liberal Government has brought this urgency upon themselves (and, regrettably, upon members of the Air Force and those they serve), by many years of deliberate penny pinching on defence.

The current plan will amount to an essentially sole-source contract. If the answer is obvious and the need is urgent, that is acceptable. Such decisions should be more about defence and security requirements and less about politics. Within the constraints of budgets and due process, the lead should be given to military staffs. The personnel flying and supporting our current C-130s under increasingly difficult circumstances deserve that, and the other military units that they support desperately need that.

We still need a strategic fixed wing airlift capability and a heavy lift rotary wing capability. There are capable aircraft available for both those roles and their manufacturer has been very pro-active in proposing cost effective acquisition programs. MND John McCallum quietly cancelled the strategic airlift program some years back, apparently at the urging of a misguided Chief of Staff.

The realities of Canada's commitments to peace making and peace enforcement (read war fighting), as well as to natural disasters, such as tsunamis and earthquakes, require on-demand strategic airlift. That means that we need to own it. We will never be able to react in less than about two weeks, if we have to line up at the local Budget Rent-an-Antonov every time something happens. A DART without feathers doesn't fly very straight, very far, or very fast.

I've also seen the airplanes and elections movie before with the New Fighter Aircraft Program. In late 1979, when Joe Clark lost count of his fingers and toes and, consequently, his government, we had the CF-18 contract completely ready for final blessing the next day. We had endured many years of false starts, extensive evaluation, delays, difficult negotiations, funding envelope changes, and many other challenges. Program Manager, Brigadier-General Paul Manson (later CDS) and his senior staff stayed up all night trying to convince the falling government to approve the program. They wouldn't and we had to do it all over again for Trudeau's Liberals. It was a black day, but we did eventually buy the CF-18 and it has performed magnificently. In reality, the delay didn't have much impact on the long-term program.

The difference between then and now is that, in 1979, we didn't have units in an active combat environment without the support they should have. Today, we do, and we need to pull out all stops to redress that situation. If we take a quick, hard look at costs, that's okay; but let's not forget what's going on out there in the real world of Afghanistan and other garden spots, where Canadian men and women are risking everything. We owe them the best and we owe it to them yesterday.

Puppy dog faces

2005-11-17T08:24:00.000-08:00

Cut it out, Prime Minister, you're killing me. You and your minions are popping up in front of every microphone and camera, putting on your best puppy dog faces and telling us how all you really want to do is make it work. You say to look at all the good things for Canadians that will be lost if the obvious and justified lack of confidence in your Government is played out in the near future.

You are the one that has dithered on such critical items as the gas rebate, refusing to allow it to proceed no fewer than three times, even though all parties were behind it.

You are the one who, as Finance Minister, strangled the Canadian Forces.

You are the one who, as Finance Minister, choked the life out of Canada's healthcare system.

Yours is the Government that has allowed our First Nations population to continue to wallow in poverty without something as simple as safe water to drink.

Yours is the Government that has wasted billion after billion on misguided or downright corrupt ventures such as the useless and irrelevant gun registry, HRDC, unaccountable Technology Partnerhsip money, and brokering election support with tax-payers money.

You are the one who solemnly promised to fix the democratic deficit and have, instead, made it more acute.

You are the one who solemnly promised to end patronage and have, instead, refined the art form.

You are the one who claimed to be able to repair the severely damaged relations that your Government caused with our biggest trade and security partner. Instead, you use every opportunity to inject "American-style" into your comments designed to stir fear in Canadians. Regardless of what are our issues with the United States, that is hardly helpful.

Yours is the Government that has done nothing to support family values and now expresses such dismay at the fact that we will have a campaign that runs through Christmas.

You are the one who has made so-called commitments that are back-end loaded by many years and will probably never happen.

Now, you pretend that they are around the corner and that the very fabric of Canada will be lost if your wretched and corrupt government falls, as it deserves to do.

Now, you want to take the money that you have sucked out of Canadians' wallets through over-taxation and feed it back to us in post-dated bribery.

No matter when an election is called, there will always be things that will be delayed. If that were allowed to delay an election, then we would never hold one and we would be stuck with a de facto Liberal dictatorship forever. True democracy doesn't work that way.

The quicker that we can put your Government out of our misery and replace it with an accountable Conservative alternative, the quicker the country can get on the real task of restoring our position with our own citizens and with our friends and allies around the world.

It is the soldier.

2005-11-10T19:07:00.000-08:00

Another eleventh hour of the eleventh day of the eleventh month is here. Fewer veterans will be on parade than last year and more than next year. Backs will be a little more bent; salutes will be a little more shaky; and more will be under wheel power. What won't have changed is the pride that the veteran feels for his country and his comrades, present and absent. His heart is ramrod straight and he has a clear vision of what it takes to make a country strong and free.

Besides respecting and honouring what the veteran has given us, what can we do to make his sacrifice worthwhile? We can honour and respect the future. We can do that by recognizing that safety and security aren't free.

More Canadians are thinking more clearly about what our current military is facing on our behalf. Part of that understanding is because of the no- nonsense approach and forthrightness of General Rick Hillier, Chief of the Defence Staff. The Canadian Forces cannot be social workers in uniform and they have to be given the right tools and enough of them to do what is a deadly job. General Hillier has been very clear about the hazards that our soldiers are facing in Afghanistan. The point is not to alarm us, but to prepare us for what is probably inevitable.

When you look at a veteran today, take a look at the young men and women in uniform on parade, as well. Imagine them in forty or fifty years at a Remembrance Day Parade. Far fewer of them will probably have lost comrades in service to Canada than the older veterans you see today. It's our job to make sure that this is as few as possible. That doesn't mean shirking our duty as a country. It means making sure that our men and women are equipped to do the job. It means supporting a significant increase in defence spending.

It means remembering that:

It's the soldier, not the reporter who has given us the freedom of the press. It's the soldier, not the poet, who has given us the freedom of speech. It's the soldier, not the politician that ensures our right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. It's the soldier who salutes the flag, who serves beneath the flag, and whose coffin is draped by the flag. They shall grow not old as we who are left grow old. Age shall not weary them, nor the years condemn. And at the going down of the sun, and in the morning, we will remember them.

Crime and .... well, just crime, actually ....

2005-10-07T14:33:00.000-07:00

Normally, we’d be talking about crime and punishment, but in Canada today, it seems that we’ve lost the concept of punishment. The Liberal governments of Trudeau, Chretien and Martin have eroded the concept of consequence for behaviour. Instead, we reward corruption and crime; show more concern about criminals’ rights than victims’ suffering; and indeed, treat criminals as the victims. Along the way, we waste mountains of taxpayer dollars on social experiments that have done nothing to make our streets safer or our citizens more secure.

Twenty years after the biggest mass murder in Canadian history (Air India Flight 182), the perpetrators are set free because our justice system is dysfunctional. The victims’ families and Canadians, in general, are outraged and demand a public inquiry. The Minister responsible responds with suitable soothing words, but no decisions. Instead, she hires former Ontario Premier Bob Rae to conduct an inquiry into whether or not we should hold a public inquiry. According to Air India Victims’ Families Association, Rae’s November report will recommend that we do hold a public inquiry. I don’t know how much this decision process cost taxpayers, but whatever the amount, it is too much. The answer was obvious from the start, and I was under the impression that we were paying Cabinet Ministers like Anne McLellan to make decisions. Does Mr. Dithers have a counterpart?

We have Paul Coffin who defrauds taxpayers out of one-and-a-half million dollars. Apparently, that’s chump change to the Liberal justice system, as Mr. Coffin gets a two-year curfew and a job teaching ethics. The irony of the latter should not be lost.

We have James Roszko who, after 44 charges and 14 convictions, many of them for violent crimes, was still not qualified to be a dangerous offender. Well, he is qualified now, but it cost us four RCMP officers for Roszko to earn that distinction posthumously.

We have prisoners who have violated society’s lawful expectations, many of them in the most violent and deadly ways, yet they still get to vote. And guess for whom they vote? I’m guessing that it’s the folks who have perpetuated a justice system that “punishes” them by giving them access to amenities and education that thousands of law-abiding Canadians can’t afford.

We have a Liberal government whose answer to criminal activity that they can’t control is to simply declare it no longer illegal. The Liberal Party is in favour of legalizing marijuana and prostitution. The Liberal Government is desperately trying to pussyfoot around the issues and not declare their real intentions before the next election. Sounds like a hidden agenda to me.

It’s time that the justice system stood up for law-abiding Canadians rather than criminals. It’s time for a Government that will stand up for Canadians and Stand Up For Canada!

Way to go, Ralph!

2005-09-26T14:30:00.000-07:00

Hat's off to Finance Minister Ralph Goodale. In one foul swoop of his tongue, he has proven, once again, that he and his Liberal government are more interested in their own short-term gratification than in the long-term well-being of Canadians.

Over the past several years, income and royalty trusts have allowed a great many Canadians at most income levels to enjoy some growth in their income and retirement portfolios. It would clearly not be acceptable to have Canadians look after themselves in retirement, without being beholden to the government. How could the government ever control them at election time with threats of losing government largesse? Of course, that largesse and the habitually hidden surpluses, read over-taxation, have come out of Canadians' pockets in the first place.

Goodale's recent musings about restricting new income and royalty trusts and sucking more tax money out of existing trusts and, therefore, Canadians' pockets, has caused an emotional sell-off in that sector. It has also cast into doubt the longer-term viability of that sector and delayed its inclusion on the TSX Index. His loose lips and potential future attacks against individual Canadians' economic well-being are incomprehensible, reprehensible, short-sighted, and just plain dumb.

Perhaps the good Finance Minister could consider letting the market decide. But, that wouldn't be the Liberal way. Perhaps the good Finance Minister could understand that, by letting Canadians build bigger RRSPs without his "help", the government will start to collect much more tax down the road. But, that wouldn't be the Liberal way. Perhaps the good Finance Minister could understand that, by allowing Canadians to build and plan for their own retirements, the pressure on the government purse would decrease in the future. But, that wouldn't be the Liberal way.

The Liberal way is to interfere with anything that does not involve maintaining their control over every aspect of Canadians' lives, instead of allowing us some self-determination. It's just one more example of the Liberal version of democracy. Welcome to the remakes of "Father Knows Best", with Paul Martin in the role formerly played by Robert Young, and "Leave it to Beaver", with Ralph Goodale starring as "The Beav".

Father does not know best and I'm not prepared to leave it to Beaver. When will Canadians, in enough numbers and in the right locations, wake up to the facts of what the Liberals are doing to them? It is way past time that these charlatans were shown the door to political wilderness and get them out of Canadians' way to a prosperous future. Enough is enough!

Flash! This just in. The good Finance Minister has also decided to hog-tie the people who create jobs, wages, wealth, productivity, foreign investment and, therefore, wait for it - taxes. Those people run Canadian corporations and they have just had their promised tax cuts pulled from the table. Liberals are interested only in political survival and not good public policy. Kowtowing to the NDP in this area may keep the Liberals alive for now, but it will continue to erode Canadians' economic welfare. It's time to Stand up for Canada!

The roses are dying.

2005-08-18T09:58:00.000-07:00

Alternate Service Delivery, or ASD, has been a part of the systematic reduction of uniformed capacity in the Canadian Forces for about twenty years. Like many other hatchet jobs that have been perpetrated on our military because of budgetary starvation, it is couched in terms of efficiency. RUBBISH!

The theory was that, anything we didn’t actually take to war could be provided by civilian contractors more cheaply and efficiently. Someone forgot to tell the hatchet men that we actually take logistics to war. And someone forgot to tell the governments who called in the hatchet men that Canada’s seemingly traditional peacekeeping missions could (and did) easily transition into theatres of combat.

The chickens are coming home to roost in this hair-brained bean counter driven scheme. Don’t get me wrong; some of my best friends are bean counters, and they were doing this at the point of the proverbial government budget gun. The problem is that they have been allowed to make de facto operational decisions that should be the mandate of operational leaders. The operational commanders should be given the authority and support to make operational decisions, and see them carried out and supported by an unbreakable logistics chain.

It was recently suggested that civilian contractors and their employees may balk at the prospect of providing in situ logistic support to elements of the Canadian Forces engaged in high threat operational theatres, such as Afghanistan. I’m sure that many would say, “Ready, Aye, Ready”, but who could really blame those who did not?

Prior to ASD, people in uniform supplied logistic support such as supply, cooks, mail, administration, transportation, airfield engineering support, and more. They were all soldiers, sailors or airmen first and could be counted on to tote a rifle, stand guard duty or engage in defensive operations, if necessary. Now, much of that support is supplied by civilian contractors, who are undoubtedly good at their jobs, but don’t fall under the same code of conduct or expectations as someone in uniform.

A less currently urgent example, but one no less harmful to our operational readiness is the lack of combat training support to our CF-18 force and to some elements of combat training for the Army and the Navy. Those assets provided air combat adversaries, electronic warfare training and gunnery tow targets. About four Chiefs of the Air Staff ago, the Air Force embarked on a plan to eliminate the combat support assets and squadrons from the inventory and replace them with a civilian contract. The current situation is that the people who use these training assets are still waiting for something more than band-aid solutions. If the final solution ever arrives, it will cost more than what we had already, provide a fraction of the training support, and offer none of the flexibility.

Alternate Service Delivery can work, but the theory has been applied to many areas where it does not belong. Like many things that have been allowed to erode our military capacity, this will take decades to reverse, even if leadership was ready to go down that road. I may be wrong, but I see no evidence of that determination.

This is not a criticism of all the dedicated "loggies" out there who provide yeoman service. It is a criticism of the government which has put operations (and people) in jeopardy for the sake of budget cuts.

It is said that operations is the rose and that logistics is the stem upon which it grows, or something like that. Someone has whipper snippered the rose bushes and Alternate Service Delivery may well be Alternate Service Disaster.

For Valour

2005-08-15T14:44:00.000-07:00

Last week, Canada said goodbye to Ernest “Smoky” Smith, our last surviving Victoria Cross winner. It was a week of fitting tribute to a true Canadian hero and so appropriate in the Year of the Veteran. What made his heroism typical of those like him is that he eschewed that label himself and preferred to bestow it on those who never left the battlefield. His job, as he saw it was to make the enemy into heroes by dying for their country, instead of him dying for his own.

He was a hero, though, in every sense of the word and he represents the pinnacle of readiness to sacrifice his own life for others. That he didn’t have to make that ultimate sacrifice is probably due to a little luck and the fact that his visible courage was enough to strike fear into the hearts of any enemy.

Will we ever see the likes of Smoky Smith again? My answer is “yes, if we have to”, while hoping that we never do. Over the past few decades, Canada has gone from being a peace keeper to being a peace restorer. We have systematically frittered away our capacity to be a peace restorer, but that is indeed what we are being called upon to do, even in a limited way.

More of our history has been spent in the role of peace restorer than what the average Canadian mistakenly views as the primary role of our men and women uniform. It would be nice to able to get back to the peacekeeping task, but there is just not enough peace to keep, and a lot of peace that has to be made. No matter which role we see ourselves engaged in, if we are not continuously ready and equipped to restore peace, we will never be able to keep it.

General Hillier has engaged in some conditioning of the Canadian public and our political leaders to the fact that, as peace restorers, we will be facing an enemy that will not accept our mandate to do that without a fight. In a fight, people get hurt and, in the kind of fights that we will be undertaking, some people will die. That’s where the new generation of Smoky Smiths may be forced to come from.

Preservation of the lives of one’s own troops is the primary aim of any commander, while accomplishing the role of defeating the enemy. With a ruthless and determined enemy such as we and our allies now face, this won’t be easy and it may not be possible. From my own albeit limited direct exposure to the teeth of the Canadian Army, and the much deeper appreciation of many of my colleagues, there is no doubt in my mind that the heart and courage of Smoky Smith is alive and well. I would not want to be the al Queda or other scumbag, to quote General Hillier, who stands between the Patricias, the RCR, or the Vandoos and their objective, or who threatens the life of one of their brothers or sisters.

Canada’s necessity to expand our role as a peace restorer is becoming more evident and compelling. We simply can’t leave that task to our allies and look them in the eye or ourselves in the mirror. Our men and women in uniform, and especially those in the Army, know this better than anyone. We owe it to them and ourselves to not fail, and that means not letting our politicians fail, in manning, training and equipping our forces to the best possible level to do the jobs that we have given them.

Smoky Smith is gone but, thanks to some determined work by others in recent years, the Victoria Cross remains as Canada’s highest honour for valour in the face of the enemy. If another Victoria Cross is won by a Canadian on the field of battle, may he or she also live to be 91 years old and enjoy the finer things in life, like well-aged single malt whiskey and fine cigars, as Smoky did. Slainte.

London Bridge is standing up.

2005-07-13T12:30:00.000-07:00

For once, I agree with Anne McLellan. Canadians are not psychologically prepared for the type of terrorist attacks that have been perpetrated upon our allies for the past several years, and since long before 9/11.

Last week's cowardly attacks on innocents in London is only the latest in a long list of wake-up calls that Canadians should heed. We shouldn't panic, but we certainly shouldn't avert our eyes and pretend that it can't happen here. It can and it will. The only questions are when and where.

Those who conduct terror don't care that we think we are nice guys. Apologists for terrorists and people who blame those who die for their own deaths are sleepwalking to their own demise. As Winston Churchill said, "An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile - hoping it will eat him last." Terrorism is a crocodile that will eat every last one of us, if we don't stop it, no matter the cost.

Can we ever eliminate terrorism? Not as long as there are people who do not value even their own lives and who will use terrorism to control their enemies, as well as their "friends". In other words - no! Can we afford to capitulate in the war against terrorists? Absolutely not! What are the costs of losing this war, and a war it surely is? Flush everything you value - summed up by the general term, quality of life - down the drain.

People in the West need to take the blinders off and realize that, no matter what we do, we will always and forever be the targets for lunatics like Osama bin Laden and Al-Queda. They have only one ultimate goal and they continue to state it loud and clear. That goal is our complete annihilation. There is only one answer to such a threat. It is not cheap and, at times, it might not be "nice". But, it must be effective.

As we have in the past, we can learn a lot from the Brits. Their reaction to mass murder was one of defiance and pluck, as they have defied past mass murderers. They are the epitome of the stiff upper lip and a bit of that stiffness should be transplanted to the backs of some other western politicians. The Brit intelligence, security and police forces are also damn good, and it came as no surprise yesterday that they had tracked down the murderers, some dead and some alive. There is really no way to prevent all terrorist attacks by a determined and clever enemy, but the Brits were able to react very swiftly. They would be one of the last countries that I would want to make really angry at me.

We can also learn an opposite lesson from Spain. They appeased the terrorist crocodile after it bit them just prior to their last national election, in which Spanish voters threw out a strongly anti-terrorist government.

What can Canada do? The first thing we can do is to stop kidding ourselves that we are different. We are all infidels in the terrorists' eyes. While I agree with Anne McLellan about our lack of psychological preparedness, I would point out to her that we are physically unprepared, as well. The reason for that is in the Offices of the Prime Minister, the Cabinet and the Liberal Caucus. To be sure, there are many MPs from all parties who understand the seriousness of the situation, but the Government, itself, has been largely somnambulant.

Despite the unquestioned quality, commitment and bravery of our men and women in uniform, both military and para-military, we have not maintained the investment in freedom and security that only they can provide. We have not maintained our intelligence network, at home and abroad, that will help prevent terrorist acts or, at least, help to swiftly track down the perpetrators after the inevitable fact. One only has to say Air India to understand that failure. We have allowed over 40,000 illegal immigrants to roam Canada at will, the vast majority in search of only a better way of life, but some undoubtedly intent on destroying ours.

Canada is a multi-cultural mosaic and I, for one, enjoy that. That doesn't mean that we should be blind to the fact that there are some members of many cultural groups, white Anglo-Saxon included, who are intent on destroying the peace, order, and good government that we aspire to in Canada. Regardless of our ethnic roots, we all have an obligation to make sure that such criminals do not succeed, because we are all in this together. The Government has an obligation to show leadership and strength in preparing us psychologically and physically, to the extent possible. As citizens, voters and tax payers, we have an obligation to hold Government's feet to the fire; and if they don't do the job, we have an obligation to fire them.

"My country is the world and my religion is to do good." - Thomas Paine

Yet another sacrifice

2005-07-05T07:44:00.000-07:00

The Royal Canadian Mounted Police have been having a rough 2005 in Alberta, and it got rougher yesterday. We were on our way to Calgary and were diverted from Highway 2 at Leduc to south of Millet for an accident. Watching the late news in Edmonton after our return, we were saddened to learn that the accident had claimed the life of Constable Jose Agostinho.

We had known Jose when he was at the Cold Lake Detachment, and since he had been transferred to Wetaskiwin. He was a very strong member of his community, not just as a law enforcer, but as a community leader. Many young Canadians were touched by Jose in his work with cadet organizations.

Many will not know that Jose served in the Canadian Forces for 15 years and flew Buffalo aircraft in the Search and Rescue role. Curiously, at Cold Lake at the same time, there was an ex-Air Force pilot serving in the RCMP (Jose) and an ex-RCMP officer flying CF-18s for the Air Force. These two people certainly knew fully the meaning of "to serve and protect".

In the Year of the Veteran and a year of RCMP remembrance in Alberta (and everywhere), please take a moment today to remember Constable Jose Agostinho, veteran Air Force pilot, RCMP officer, husband, father, son, and friend.

"Maintiens le droit"

Into Africa

2005-07-04T08:44:00.000-07:00

We've just witnessed the biggest worldwide rock concert in history, with the aim of raising awareness to the plight of Africa. The situation in Africa is dire and it is getting worse. The focus of Sir Bob's awareness efforts is the leaders of the G-8. I suggest that they are probably the most aware of all of the world's leaders and the most sympathetic and responsive of all the world's leaders. Could the G-8 leaders and the people that they represent do more? Sure they could. Are they and we the root cause of what ails Africa? Absolutely not!

There are reams of data about the hundreds of billions of dollars that have been poured into Africa by the G-8 and others. Not much of it has actually gone to making life better for Africans, other than a collection of ruthless and murderous dictators. These tyrants are eventually overthrown and replaced by more ruthless and murderous dictators. Will more hundreds of billions of dollars make a difference by themselves? Absolutely not!

Much has been written over more than a century about the colonization of Africa by non-African countries. There were certainly abuses of the continent and its peoples. Despite that, living conditions were arguably better under colonial rule in many countries. Since independence, most of them have slipped into crippling poverty and disease under the leadership of the aforementioned dictators. Just because many of these people were educated in the West does not make the West responsible for their abuses.

The British, French, Dutch, Portugese and others established the rule of law, infrastructure, industry, a civil service, education, churches and many other institutions associated with freedom and democracy. There were abuses, to be sure, but I don't think that what we see now is an improvement. The nations of Africa rightly demanded and achieved their independence, sometimes peacefully and sometimes violently. The nations of Africa are free of colonial rule by foreigners, but they're not free of colonial rule by their own leaders.

The people that need some awareness training are the very people who are grinding their own populations into the dirt. Bush, Blair, Martin, etal may be household names, but how about Abacha, Ahidjo, Kabila, Kbaki and, my personal favourite, Robert Mugabe? While we're at it, how about people like the Sultan of Brunei? I've just seen pictures of the interior of his private jet, complete with sinks of solid gold and Lalique crystal. It makes Air Force One look like a C-47 left over from the Burma Hump.

The well-meaning folks who are gathering in Edinburgh by the hundreds of thousands are right to take the situation in Africa very seriously. Would that it was as simple as pouring more hundreds of billions at the problem and it would magically disappear. That is just not reality.

Until there is some accountability for all that money pouring into dictators' personal bank accounts, nothing will change. Until there is the establishment of the rule of law, infrastructure, sound economies, healthcare, birth control, and more, nothing will change.

Who is going to change it? If the West tries to change those things from the outside, we will be accused of trying to re-colonize Africa. They will have to be changed from the inside. Why didn't some of the people in Edinburgh make the trip to Libya, instead? At the same time as the G-8 is meeting in Scotland, the fifty-three members of the African Union are meeting closer to their problem. Albeit with our help, but they are the ones who hold the key to the solution.

Like any problem of such enormity, the solution will take decades to take effect, if it ever does. The West can help finance and provide guidance to the solution, but we can't run it. It would also be the height of foolishness to simply open our wallets to continually support a status quo that will never change without change from within.

In Canada's case, we are being pilloried by some for falling short of the 0.7% of GDP that Lester Pearson proposed many years ago as the foreign aid goal for developed countries. In simple donated dollar terms, they are right. What they fail to factor in is the money that we spend and have spent on the wide variety of foreign missions that we have undertaken in Europe, Africa, the Middle East, Asia and Latin America.

Another regrettable, but inevitable, aspect of the Edinburgh spectacle will be the hijacking of the process by professional protestors. This small, but well-organized, group of thugs, punks and anarchists has no real interest in solving Africa's problems. That is because solving such problems will take the support of democratic governments in Africa by democratic governments in the West.

The key word here is government. Herewith, Oxford's definitions of three important words:

anarchism - n. the doctrine that all government should be abolished.
anarchist - n. an advocate of anarchism or political disorder.
anarchy - n. 1 disorder, esp. political or social. 2 lack of government in a society.

What Africa needs is good order and strong democratic governments, not more of the anarchy that has been, literally, killing them. Violent anarchists have nothing to contribute and have no place among the decent folks in Edinburgh and elsewhere. They do have a place, though, and that is behind bars.

The United Nations should be playing a key role in the process, in cooperation with the African Union, the G-8 countries, and others. Regrettably, the majority of the 192 members of the UN are ruled by the same type of folks who have been, at the same time, siphoning wealth from the West to their personal benefit and trashing the West for not giving them more. Kofi Annan does not help when he parrots the dictators' demands and demands little from the dictators in return.

The West does care and the G-8 leaders do care about the plight of Africa, but throwing endless money down a dark hole won't solve the problem. If it would, perhaps Sir Bob and his pals could contribute some of the proceeds of the Live 8 version of Sgt Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band, which went on sale within an hour of the concert. We all need to do more, but let's do it with our eyes open, as well as our wallets.

If men could learn from history, what lessons it might teach us! But passion and party blind our eyes, and the light which experience gives us is a lantern on the stern which shines only on the waves behind us.
- Samuel Taylor Coleridge

Canada Day

2005-07-01T19:22:00.000-07:00

We've just come back from a day in Edmonton celebrating Canada Day 2005, and it reminded me of all that we have to celebrate.

Canada has been through a lot in our 138 years of official nationhood. In the family of nations, we're still just a kid with a lot to learn. For a kid, we haven't done too badly and we've given the family a lot of things.

In the world of aviation and space exploration, we gave them the anti-g suit (1940), the Canadarm (1981), the crash position indicator (1959), the helicopter bear trap for landing on a ship's deck, the jet airliner, the radio compass, STOL aircraft, and the variable pitch propeller (1918). We've also given them people like J.A.D. McCurdy, Billy Bishop, Wop May, Buzz Beurling, Andrew Mynarsky, Max Ward, Marc Garneau, Chris Hadfield, Roberta Bondar, Julie Payette and many, many more.

In the world of sports we've contributed games such as basketball (1892), lacrosse (circa 1600), hockey and five pin bowling (1909). The names Naismith, Howe, Richard, Orr, Gretzky, Villeneuve and hundreds more have brought us international glory.

The world is a healthier place because of Canadian inventions like insulin (1921), polio vaccine, the pacemaker, heart valve operations and the CPR dummy.

Some things could only have been invented in Canada. Who else would have come up with the snowblower (1927), the snowmobile (1937) and, of course, Muskol.

Canada has led the way with communications firsts like the telephone (1874), the foghorn (1854), newsprint (1838), the walkie-talkie (1942), wirephoto and standard time.

For the household, Canada has supplied the electric cooking range (1882), gingerale (1904), pablum (1930), frozen fish (1926), kerosene (1840), the first patented lightbulb (1874), the jolly jumper and the washing machine.

In the miscellaneous category, we gave the world the rollerskate, the ear piercer, the hydrofoil, the IMAX theatre, Superman (1938), Trivial Pursuit (1982), the zipper, AND, drum roll please, the brainstorm of a brilliant young inventor named Steve Pasjac. In 1957, Steve invented the retractable beer carton handle and beer lovers have been thanking him ever since.

The entertainment world has been enriched by more Canadian entertainers in every category than is possible to list. And, most of them are assumed to be American, because that's where they've made their money.

Finally, we've given the family well over one hundred thousand of our sons and daughters in the name of freedom. In this Year of the Veteran and every year, we should never forget what they sacrificed or take for granted what they have given us.

What we saw today in Edmonton is some of what we have. It was the spectacle of people of all shapes, sizes, ages, and ethnicities enjoying themselves. Where there's water, there are kids; and we didn't see anything bigger than a puddle at City Hall or at the Legislature grounds that didn't have kids playing in it. Everywhere was a sea of red and white, music and laughter in the air, and people celebrating being Canadian or just being in Canada. Only in Alberta would you see a lovely young lady doing a balletic pas de deux in logger’s boots with a Bobcat as her partner.

It all gave me pause to think about some of what I've been hearing from some of the many people that I'm talking to these days. That is the talk that maybe Albertans are getting tired of getting what they see as the short straw from Ottawa, and that maybe it's time to look at going it on our own.

I can understand and empathize with the anger that some people are feeling and giving vent to. I cannot agree with their solution. We have come too far and accomplished and sacrificed too much together with the rest of Canada, to give serious thought to leaving. We may not succeed in getting everything that we think we deserve, but separation wouldn't make it any better.

Like many people, my family has had the opportunity to live, work or play in every part of the country. We love every part of the country.

There is success in achievement, but there is also success in effort. There are many things that need to be fixed in Canada, but we can't do it unless we're prepared to work together. We also can't do it unless we're prepared to accept less than we think we deserve. Naturally, we want people in other parts of the country to feel the same way. The best way to accomplish that is to talk to them and listen to them.

We think too small. Like the frog at the bottom of the well. He thinks the sky is only as big as the top of the well. If he surfaced, he would have an entirely different view. - Mao Tse-Tung

The Book Virus.........

2005-06-30T10:32:00.000-07:00

I've been tagged with the Book Virus by my Conservative pal, Vitor, at "What It Takes To Win", so here goes.

1. Number of books I own. We have owned thousands, but we recycle them through our children and to libraries, etc. My mother was a high school history teacher and we inherited a lot of history books. W've also got a lot of books on aviation, business, autosports, and cooking. At the moment, I'm guessing that we have about 300 on the shelf and many more in boxes.

2. Books that mean a lot to me. My pilot's log book, which holds about thirty-five years of my life. My mother's University of Manitioba Yearbook from 1929. Any of Churchill's books.

3. Books I have read recently. The "Tipping Point" and "Blink" by Malcolm Gladwell. "Boyd, the fighter pilot who changed the art of war" by Robert Coram. "The Art of War" by Sun Tzu - again. Lest you get the idea that I'm pre-occupied with physical warfare, there are a lot of lessons applicable to political warfare in those books. More fun books are cook books by anyone.

4. The To-Read List. "Stephen Harper and the Future of Canada" by William Johnson, and the anxiously awaited, but as yet unwritten, "My life after federal politics" by Anne McLellan.

And the next tags go to "Waking up on Planet X" and "BendGovernment".

Jumping to conclusions - a clarification

2005-06-30T10:00:00.000-07:00

For the benefit of those who get their exercise jumping to conclusions and making leaps of logic, please allow me to clarify something from my blog "A Conflict of Hypocrisies".
UPDATE: Some of the comments made some good points and I have further clarified my post:

I refered to Jack Layton as the Duty National Socialist Leader. For those who like to "exercise", that suggested that I was calling Jack Layton a Nazi, and that I was disrespecting all those who died at Hitler's hands. Please settle down and park your misplaced indignation.
I had no intention whatsoever of suggesting that ANY Canadian elected official was a Nazi. I believe the term is completely outside the pale of acceptable political discourse.
I apologize to anyone who may have mistakenly believed that that was my intent -- I should have been clearer in my writing.
When I wrote the blog I meant "National" to refer to Canada and "Socialist" to refer to Mr. Layton's professed political philosophy. Period. Dot. Stop. In no way did I intend those words to mean anything else. I'm sorry that the capital letters confused some people. I had not intended them to signify a proper noun. I have changed the phrasing to "Canada's federal" to correct the mis-impression.
For those who lectured me on history and defending democracy, back off. I spent more than thirty years and buried more than forty friends defending your right to yell at me and to jump to conclusions when I mis-speak or mis-capitalize. I hope that you enjoyed it, even though you are way off base. Now get back to work or go to the gym for some real exercise.

A Conflict of Hypocrisies

2005-06-24T08:00:00.000-07:00

NOTE: See subsequent post for correction

Recent "revelations" that military members get accelerated access to things like MRIs and other diagnostic tests seems to have shocked some people. Considering the systemic mistreatment of the military by the Liberal Government and the jobs that the over-tasked and under-appreciated members of the Canadian Forces are asked to do on short notice, shouldn't even the socialists of the medicare debate cut them some slack?

What do they think happens with firefighters, law enforcement personnel, anyone covered by Workers Compensation and, ahem, Members of Parliament?

Like so many things that the military used to be able to count on in the performance of their duties, access to their own health care system has been severely cut back. Like every other shortfall that the military endures, this has been primarily due to a lack of adequate funding.

By contracting out military health care, the Liberals can be seen to do something about their long-term hypocrisy about how they treat the military. Alas, it now exposes their hypocrisy about the realities of healthcare delivery in Canada.

In my thirty years as a pilot, I served on many squadrons. On every one, we had a flight surgeon assigned, and he or she was part of our squadron team. They went everywhere with us, and we trusted them with our careers. As any military aviator knows, the annual medical is an occasion that calls up all manner of fear and trepidation that something might be found to clip one's wings.

If the Government of Canada and the Canadian people expect the military to be ready when needed; then priority access to health care should be a given. If local communities want police and firefighters to be available to respond to their emergencies; then priority access to health care should be a given. If companies need skilled individuals to keep the engine of the economy running and they pay into Worker's Compensation; then priority access to health care should be a given.

Healthy military and para-military organizations equal physical security. A healthy workforce equals economic security.

Doctors in uniform also provided a valuable asset to their local civilian communities. In many cases, the only qualified specialist capabilities, such as anaesthesiology, resided in the military doctors in remote locations, such as Cold Lake. Cutbacks in military medical service also caused hardship to nearby civilian populations and increased the overall cost of health care for those areas.

Maybe, if the military budget hadn't been so decimated by Paul Martin, places like Cold Lake might even have MRIs and qualified people to help serve the surrounding area. Maybe machines could be used more than the restricted hours now available because of the power that organized labour holds over health care delivery in Canada.

There are many things wrong with Canada's health care system. Those ills won't be solved simply by promising to replace, over ten years, less than was ripped out (adjusted for inflation) , in the first few years of Paul Martin's rule as Finance Minister. And, they certainly won't be solved by picking on organizations like the Canadian Forces who are simply doing what they have to do to meet the commitments that we have given them.

The pious condemnation of anything that smacks of anyone getting preferential treatment, regardless of logic, common sense and need, reminds me of an old Winston Churchill quote - "The inherent vice of Capitalism is the unequal sharing of blessings. The inherent virtue of Communism is the equal sharing of misery."

Okay everyone, hands up all who think that Canada's federal socialist leader, Jack Layton, would put himself at the back of the queue if he (or his wife) needed an MRI. I didn't think so.

CSI, Law & Order and CPAC

2005-06-15T07:40:00.000-07:00

Crime Scene Investigation (CSI), Law & Order, and confidence votes in the House of Commons were all on at the same time last night, and they seemed somehow complementary.

On CSI, a head chef is murdered and dismembered. On Law & Order, a member of the world's oldest profession is murdered by her madam. The crime is covered up by the madam's father, and she gets off scot-free. On CPAC, we watch the slow death and dismemberment of Canadian democracy every day, by practitioners of the world's second oldest profession. The crimes are covered up and the perpetrators get off scot-free. It all seems sadly to fit, if you'll forgive the obvious irony in the titles.

None of these TV shows are happy stories. Two can be fixed by script writers. One can only be fixed by Canadian voters. Our new door-knocking campaign has again put me in touch with those Canadians, and they are a fine bunch of people. Confused, angry, disillusioned, skeptical and much more, but still fine people.

At Spruce Meadows last weekend, we watched some of the finest Law & Order Canadians, the RCMP Musical Ride, carry out a spectacular performance, despite a torrential downpour. They embodied the determination and skill needed to succeed under difficult conditions, and all that is good about Canada and Canadians. Made us all proud.

After door-knocking last night, we were having a coffee in Tim Horton's. Three senior ladies stopped me on the way out and we chatted for about fifteen minutes about what it might take to straighten things out. It seems that our honourable opponent, who shall remain nameless but sits to the right of Paul Martin, does not have their confidence or trust. Another couple broke into our conversation on their way out to express the same sentiment. On my way out, I was stopped by yet another man, who wished us well in Round 2, even though he lives in Peace River. I've gotta hang around Tim Horton's more often.

It's time that these and all other Canadians had their faith restored in politics, politicians and the political process. Hey, how tough can that be? They won't get it by watching CPAC.

I have to say that Law & Order gave me some hope. The father may have covered up a murder, but he was nailed for "enterprise fraud" in the end and sent to the penalty box. Hmmm ..... sponsorship ..... gun registry ..... HRDC ..... vote buying ..... bribery ..... enterprise fraud ..... the Paul Martin Liberals ..... yeah, we can do better, if enough Canadians demand better and decide to stand up for Canada - now, more than ever.

Take a trip to www.conservative.ca; go to "The Party", then to "Key Documents" and click on Conservative Party of Canada Policy Declaration (pdf). Have a good read about what our future could and should look like.

Stay tuned. Script writers at work.

In the Company of Eagles

2005-06-05T20:56:00.000-07:00

"In the Company of Eagles" is the title of a book written by Ernest K. Gann, and which I read at least thirty years ago. It still sits on my shelf and I may read it again after the last Saturday night that I spent "in the company of eagles".

Gann wrote of two mortal enemies in World War I, a French fighter pilot named Paul Chamay and a German fighter pilot named Sebastian Kupper. Chamay and Kupper were fictional gladiators in the early days of aviation. The "eagles" that I spent time with Saturday were (and are) gladiators in peace and war. All of them have made significant contributions to Canada as aviators or aviation pioneers.

The occasion was the annual ceremony inducting deserving members into the Canada's Aviation Hall of Fame.The Hall is physically located in Wetaskiwin, Alberta along with the Reynolds Alberta Museum. The Canadian Aviation Hall of Fame and the Reynolds Alberta Museum are two jewels that, if you haven't visited, you should. They are modern, relevant and spectacular.

One couldn't begin to add up the years of experience in the room of about 250 men and women who have forged Canada's history through the use of the aircraft and aviation.

4 Wing Cold Lake's Aerospace Engineering and Test Establishment (AETE) was recognized with the Belt of Orion Award for outstanding contributions to Canada's aviation development by providing world class flight test and experimental services. The folks at AETE have led the way in the flight test business. That granted, as an old friend said later in the evening: "It's nice to see that AETE has finally finished the Harvard (Mk I) flight notes".

It was a thrill to be in the room with the spirit of people like the late Alexander Beaufort Fraser Fraser-Harris. Way too many names, but a man who was called the "Father of Canadian Naval Aviation". His wife, Jean, gave an eloquent thank you for the honour bestowed on one of the few men who had the personal integrity to just say "no" to Paul Hellyer and the folly of departmental integration of the Canadian Forces in 1964.

Kenneth Cecil Maclure's spirit (1914 - 1988) was also celebrated and recognized as a pioneer in the field of polar navigation and safer worldwide air transport operations. Despite his best efforts, he couldn't stop Martin Hartwell from getting hopelessly lost in the North and in need of rescue by the CF Search and Rescue folks three times, but that's another story.

Live and in person was Eric McConachie who spent fifty-two years as an innovator with Canadian Pacific Airlines, Canadair, Bombardier and in private consulting. He was largely responsible for the international success of Bombardier's Regional Jet program.

Also live and in person was one of the most accomplished, yet modest, Canadian aviators with whom I have had the pleasure to work. Colonel (ret) Chris Hadfield is one of the few Canadians to truly "slip the surly bonds of earth" as an astronaut aboard Shuttle Missions STS-74 and STS-100. Chris tells a great story of loitering at low level in a two-ship formation of CF-18s going about as slow as they could and Chris's aviator father, Roger, doing a split-S to join on their wing with his tail-dragger aerobat. Flight safety weenies should note that the statute of limitations has expired.

Many, many pioneers of Canadian military and civilian aviation enjoyed the evening with the Guest of Honour, Lieutenant Governor Normie Kwong, who offered a slightly cheeky, but situationally appropriate toast to "my new buddy, the Queen".

The point of this positive blog (two in a row; I think I'm becoming a wimp) is that Canada has a rich heritage in aviation that must be preserved and promoted. I'm told that the Canadian Aviation Hall of Fame has some financial challenges. This is probably not a surprise, but it is something that needs to be addressed.

In large part, Canada was built by air within our borders and our national mettle was forged on the world stage by our aviation heroes in peace and war over the past century. It is a legacy that we have a sacred duty to protect.

When I spend time like last Saturday with people like Hall of Famer Joe Schultz (night fighter ace flying Bristol Beaufighters and DeHavilland Mosquitos with 410 Cougar Squadron), it makes me appreciate what some Canadians has been through to give us what we so take for granted today.

Some years back, I made representation to Heritage Minister Sheila Copps about how the Canadian Forces Snowbirds should be funded as a national program and not just as part of the CF budget. I was thanked, patted on the head, and told to leave such weighty decisions to the grownups.

I don't know what the annual budget for the Canadian Aviation Hall of Fame is, but it's money well spent with respect to preserving Canada's heritage. I'm sure that Heritage Minister, the Honourable Liza Frulla would love to hear from you at Frulla.L@parl.gc.ca about how much you value and want to preserve Canada's aviation heritage and the Canadian Aviation Hall of Fame. The Conservative Party of Canada Heritage Critic would also like to hear from you at Oda.B@parl.gc.ca. She didn't tell me that, but I'm sure she won't mind.

It was somehow appropriate that, while about twenty aviation folks were enjoying the fruits of vintners' and distillers' labours in the front bar of the Westin later in the evening, former Minister of National Defence Perrin Beatty should come through the front door to say hi. He thought he was just there to check in.

And now for something completely different.

2005-05-31T20:21:00.000-07:00

With so much negativity and angry blogs around, how about a happy one, for a change? We still have a lot to be happy and proud about, being Canadian and, particularly, being Albertan.

Yesterday, I spent the day escorting six significant Edmonton citizens around Exercise Maple Flag at 4 Wing Cold Lake for the day. We attended briefings on the fighter pilot training programs; crawled around CF-18s and Hawks; flew the Hawk simulator; watched the CF-18 flight demonstration pilot perform; attended the Maple Flag mass briefing; watched the exercise live on the big screen; had a great burger with a bunch of multi-national air and groundcrew; and watched the launch of Canadian CF18s, Israeli / Dutch / Belgian / American F-16s, French Mirage 4000s and Mirage 1s, British Tornados, Israeli tankers, AWACS, and C-130 and C-160 trash haulers, from about a hundred feet away right beside the runway. The ears split; the ground shook; the air reeked of burnt jet fuel; the grins spread; and the testosterone spiked.

What made it really great was the pride and professionalism that we saw everywhere. Participants from seven countries and observers from several more worked together to get the mission accomplished. It's this kind of training and cooperation that leads to success in combat. And it's the Canadian role in bringing it all together that made us most proud of what we saw. Young and not-so-young men and women are still giving it everything they've got, despite all of the shortfalls that they are forced to deal with.

It's too bad that more Canadians can't see first hand the quality and dedication of our men and women in uniform. Maybe they'd understand what a great resource we have and how important it is to nurture it back to full health.

Tonight, I attended the annual dinner of Merit Contractors Association, an organization committed to supporting the right of employers and employees to promote free enterprise. They have many programs in branches across Canada, all intended to promote best practices in the trades, effective training and apprenticeship programs, and labour harmony in the contracting business. They are very successful and, in the past year alone, excused $1.28 million in apprenticeship fees and put 1,850 people through apprenticeship programs. That's just in Alberta. The awards and speeches by apprentices and their companies showed that business and industry can thrive in the open shop environment. It is the Alberta Advantage at work for Albertans.

One of the participants in the evening was from Alberta's Promise, an organization whose mission is to inspire and encourage businesses, agencies, communities and individuals to adopt the Alberta's Promise commitment to children. They celebrate successes and recognize accomplishments to motivate all Albertans to participate in making Alberta a better place for children to live, learn and grow. Their promise is to be partners with their neighbors, heroes to their children and champions of their childrens' futures.

They have many partners, like Merit Contractors, and the more time that I spend at many different such events, the more I realize that everyone is partnering with everyone else. Life is one big partnership and, if we could spread that attitude to more areas, like, um, say, politics, the better off we'd all be.

The last two days have reminded me why I'm still proud to be a Canadian and an Albertan. Sometimes, ya just gotta do that.

Honour amongst Liberals

2005-05-18T08:00:00.000-07:00

I'm guessing that yesterday set a record for the use of the words "Belinda Stronach" in blogs, editorials, letters to the editor, coffee shops, water coolers, etc., etc. Many derogatory things were said about Ms. Stronach and a lot of colourful language was used. Most of it was naturally emotional and much of it was a bit over the top. Belinda will wear many of the characterizations for years and everyone can decide for themselves whether she deserves them or not.

In the Liberal caucus today, the Deputy Prime Minister mustered all of her best self-righteous indignation and denounced Conservatives as sexist and misogynist. Later, she will, predictably, surround herself with like-minded indignants to denounce every Conservative as various things that Liberals would like us to be......and we are not.

The issue is not one of gender. It is not one of personal professional capabilities. It is not one of personal intelligence. It is one of personal honour. And that, my friends, is utterly lacking in the Liberal Party and their newest member.

Some will argue that there is little honour left in public service, and there is plenty of evidence to back that up. Like a lot of things that they do, the Liberals have turned dishonour into an art form. In the process, they have further discredited the notion of politics as an honourable profession.

Ms. Stronach certainly doesn't honour loyalty or commitment to people or organizations. She doesn't honour her debts ($379,000 owed to her former party), although I don't think that she'd be hard pressed to pony up.

There surely are honourable people in every political party and all of them must cringe at least a bit at the lack of honour and integrity displayed by Ms. Stronach. Her "lack of complexity" will probably do her in, in the end, and Conservatives shouldn't lose too much sleep over her new red Armani.

On May 10th, she said, "We gave Paul Martin and his government the chance to finally do the right thing, but once again, they have failed."

She voted five times to put the Liberal Government out of our misery.

On May 17th, she praised the same Prime Minister and Party that she had trashed the day before. Not to worry, later the same day she said to CTV, "I'm not here to defend the actions of the Liberals."

Um, Belinda, what the hell are you here for?

Some people have expressed concern about the Conservative election secrets that Ms. Stronach would leak to the Liberals. Please be clear that I'm quoting a Liberal MP who wished to remain nameless, "That's okay, she won't remember them, anyway."

Not surprisingly, there will be folks in her new caucus who might not be too pleased to see their loyalty and hard work passed over by their Leader. He has only one principle, and that is hanging on to power at any cost. Not much of a principle and certainly no honour. Ms. Stronach will fit right in.

I guess that even multi-millionaires have their price, and it apparently takes another one to know what that is.

Airborne - reborn or stillborn?

2005-05-04T07:18:00.000-07:00

On the sixtieth anniversary of the liberation of Europe, it is fitting to have a quick look at the recently announced revitalization of Canada's airborne infantry capability. In WW II, Canadian paratroop forces played a major role and the Canadian Airborne Regiment continued to enjoy a proud history in peacetime, until Somalia.

The point here is not to replay the Somalia affair. Suffice to say that the Airborne fell prey to political correctness, as the many suffered for the sins of the few. It's time to redress that error of political expediency and cowardice in the face of orchestrated public opinion.

The recently announced "911 Force" to be drawn from three existing regiments is a good start, but it's only a start. Their role in support of JTF2 is also a good start, but it's only a start.

The mandate to be lightly equipped and adequately trained sounds fine, so long as it's not an excuse to define "light" and "adequate" as something less than what is really required. Call me cynical, but Canadian governments of all stripes have often set low standards in military affairs and failed to achieve them.

With promised funding not kicking in for several years, it might be easy for government to let this excellent initiative slide, if they get the chance. The defence community, in and out of uniform, can't allow that to happen.

The other thing that the defence community should do, in my humble view, is to make the size and capability of the new force as robust as possible. They can be light, but they also have to be damned strong, in terms of arms, equipment and training. They may not need to have the individual training standards of JTF2 in some areas, but they can't be just a cleanup crew, either. If they are not capable of taking on a combat task in their own right, they will not fulfill the mandate that they should.

General Hillier and his planners are on the right track in many areas, although I think they're perpetuating a serious flaw with the lack of attention to organic strategic airlift. We have to keep the pressure on the government, whatever it looks like after the 2005 election, to not play games with defence funding (such as clawing back over 40% of the $1.1 billion promised over the next two years). The rebirth of the airborne capability will take many years and it will be easy to let it slide.

Here's a radical idea. How about we make the longer term plan to simply re-establish the Canadian Airborne Regiment, once the capability has been built up within the three existing regiments? Then, keep building those regiments until they are up to an appropriate level of manning, equipment, training and capability. The whole process will probably take twenty years, but we can't rebuild in a day what government has torn down over decades.

Our condo neighbour is a wizened older fella whose normal attire includes a burgundy T-shirt with the blue Airborne logo on the front. He is still a proud member of his regiment and I think that we have an obligation, to him and to Canada, to make sure that it is reborn and not stillborn.

The Tipping Point

2005-04-24T17:00:00.000-07:00

This weekend, I read a book by Malcolm Gladwell, called The Tipping Point. It is a best seller and discusses the phenomenon of social epidemics, such as fashion trends, disease, or behavioural patterns such as crime. The gist is that sudden and sweeping change (an epidemic) may be brought about by the confluence of seemingly small factors, the right people, and the right context.

The mention of crime naturally conjured up the words Gomery, Adscam and Liberal. Social epidemics, as expressed in political terms, have happened at regular intervals in Canada's history. In Alberta, it was the sweeping in of the Socreds in the thirties and the sweeping out of the Socreds in the early seventies. More recently on the national front, it was the sweeping out of the Liberals in 1984 and the sweeping out of the Progressive Conservatives in 1993.

The three rules of the Tipping Point are the Law of the Few, the Stickiness Factor, and the Power of Context. If we apply those rules to current Canadian politics, it's easy to conclude that Paul Martin and the Liberals are at their Tipping Point.

The Law of the Few suggests that social epidemics are heavily dependent on people with a particular and rare set of social gifts. In Canada at the moment, we can imagine that "gift" might also mean "curse". Paul Martin's curse is that of being one who has been hanging around in much too close proximity to corruption and possibly criminal activity for much too long to plead ignorance and innocence with any plausibility.

The Stickiness Factor refers to messaging, whether intentional or incidental. When something is repeated often enough, or is catchy enough, it sticks. Even non-smokers would be able to complete the sentence "Winston tastes good, .........................". Okay, maybe non-smokers as old as I am. The incidental message that Canadians have been receiving for over a year, and particularly loud and clear in the past few weeks, is that Liberals and their government are corrupt and possibly criminal. It matters not whether it's this group of Liberals or that group of Liberals, or whether it's all Liberals or just some Liberals
-- it's Liberals.

The Power of Context says that human beings are a lot more sensitive to their environment than they may seem. Canadian voters tend to have a high threshold of pain and short memories. The key to getting people to change their behaviour is the feeling of distress that can develop in the proper context. That context today is that we simply can't accept the demonstrated conduct and attitude of far too many Liberals and their successive governments.

Mr. Martin, you are at The Tipping Point. Begging is unseemly for the leader of a country like Canada, and I was embarrassed for you last week. It's time that Canadian voters gave you the final push off the cliff of political oblivion and put you all out of our misery.

Closure and justice denied.

2005-04-08T00:00:00.000-07:00

It has been twenty years since the worst mass murder and terrorist act in Canada's history took place, with the loss of Air India Flight 182. We are no closer to seeing justice done than we were on June 23rd, 1985. On that day, 329 mostly Canadian lives were consumed by an explosion at 31,000 feet and their bodies were buried in the Irish Sea. Two more lives were lost at Narita Airport in Japan shortly before Air India 182 went down.

Their histories will live on as a shameful example of Canada's inability to deal with reality. Their futures and those of their descendants are forever lost to us. In good conscience, we cannot go into that future without the illumination of a public judicial inquiry on behalf of the familes and on behalf of the future safety of all Canadians.

After the recent verdict of innocence, I was extremely impressed by the reactions of the families. Although they were deeply hurt by the apparent lack of justice, they all spoke passionately and calmly and with a deep respect for being Canadian. Their grace and dignity in a very difficult and painful situation set a fine example. We owe them the closure and justice that are being denied.

It has been twenty years of justice delayed, and there is no question that this is now justice denied. The Canadian justice system has been tied in knots of impotence by those who are clever enough and rich enough to do so. The members of the RCMP, CSIS and other organizations have undoubtedly done their best. The net result, however, is that someone has gotten away with 331 counts of first-degree murder.

Justice Josephson said in his judgment that the acquittals of Ajaib Singh Bagri and Ripudaman Singh Malik were the result of unacceptable negligence in the handling of evidence. It took twenty years to get to this point. We're no smarter or more reassured that we have fixed the situation, let alone brought the guilty parties to justice. On a scale of lives lost, this is 165 times more egregious than the miscarriage of justice in the O.J. Simpson case.

We have no decent option other than holding a full public judicial inquiry into this case. It will not be about guilt or innocence for the crime. It will be about the ability of our public safety and security apparatus to ensure our safety. It will be about finding out how terrorist individuals and organizations could have so effectively manipulated our security and justice systems.

The Deputy Prime Minister, Solicitor General, and Minister for Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness, Anne McLellan, spoke in Parliament yesterday about the futility of a public judicial inquiry. Instead, she will seek advice from an eminent but un-named Canadian, before she proceeds.

She opines that it might be premature to hold an inqury. Premature?! Twenty years!? After she has consulted the mystery Canadian, she will have a chat with the families and listen to what are their concerns. Madam, they have given you their concerns loud and clear. They want a public judicial inquiry. Please quit hiding behind your authority and ability to prevaricate and obfuscate and respond.

She wondered aloud about whether B.C. might appeal the Josephson decision and said that any public judicial inquiry couldn't take place while that appeal was in progress. Nonsense. The appeal would address the evidence and the public judicial inquiry would address the process.

She spoke of the investigations that our partners-in-justice in India and Ireland had conducted. Indeed they have, and members of their organizations have concluded that our process was flawed and incompetent.

Has anything changed? She would have us think so and, in fairness, some positive changes have been made. However, evidence is still routinely being destroyed, and who knows who will get away with murder in the future because of it? How many witnesses will live under death sentences by organized crime and terrorism and have to live out their days in witness protection programs?

Yesterday in the House, Ms. McLellan and her Parliamentary Secretary did the Ali shuffle that they are so good at. We've already spent $130 million on this case, they offer as a reason to quit. Well folks, you've also spent one billion after another on an idiotic gun registry to absolutely no positive effect. How about giving a bit of the same sticktoitiveness to our national security? I think that Canadians would understand.

The irony is that Canada, itself, was not even the direct target of this heinous crime. Canada is a rich multi-cultural mosaic, and I enjoy that very much. An unfortunate by-product of that benefit is that we have also inherited many Old World hatreds, terrorism and criminality, that are now being played out against Canadian citizens and our country.

Our justice, security and immigration systems have had their hands tied, despite their best intentions and the dedication of the individual members of their organizations. Yesterday, Anne McLellan repeated the old (and true) expression that a government has no greater responsibility to its citizens than to ensure the security of the state. Well, madam, you and your government have let us down in the areas of justice, immigration, national security, national defence, and more. I don't think that you have what it takes to fix it. Move over.

If the glove fits...........

2005-04-06T16:59:00.000-07:00

The Liberals must have been watching reruns of the O.J. Simpson trial this week, when they reacted with such indignation to the revelations coming out of the Gomery Inquiry, courtesy of an American blogger. They are now throwing themselves on the gullibility of the population with their hand-wringing plea that is they, the poor misunderstood Liberals, who are actually the victims of fraud in the case. Heh?!?

It would be funny, if it were not so pathetic. One expects that, at any moment, Johnny Cochran will rise from the dead and march into Parliament brandishing a bloody glove for one of the innocenti to try on.

We will leave no stone unturned in our search for the guilty parties, intones the Prime Minister's pet parrot, Scott Brison. He is looking remarkably naked for someone who was just voted the Best Dressed Male MP. Maybe, like O.J, they should start golfing around the country in search of the guilty party, and maybe they should start in Shawinigan.

We will send our lawyers to Gomery to defend the honour of the poor, downtrodden Liberal Party ............ at taxpayers' expense. How about defending taxpayers' expense at the cost of Liberal (dis)honour?

It must be those dastardly "parallel" Liberals, declares the Prime Minister's French Lieutenant and Transport Minister, Jean Lapierre. What the heck is a parallel Liberal? That's right up there with "my dog ate my homework" and "collateral damage". Don't buy an airline from this guy.

The Prime Minister is in desparate auto-flail trying to tie the Conservatives to the separatist Bloc, because both parties are outraged at Liberal corruption. It's not that the NDP aren't outraged. They are, but they are not the threat to Liberal hegemony that the Conservatives represent. All Canadians should be outraged.

If you have been watching Question Period, you've seen the Deputy Prime Minister poking and tugging at the Boss's sleeve, as if prompting him to another evasive and defensive retort (as opposed to answer) to a straightforward question by Stephen Harper, etal. That's not surprising, since her performance as the defender of public safety and emergency preparedness has just been panned by the Auditor General.

The Liberals' inability to accept responsibility for their actions and their playing the victim should come as no surprise. This fits right in with their habit of upholding criminals' rights over victims' rights in our out-of-touch justice system. Wasn't she also Justice Minister?

If you have surfed "Captain's Quarters", you'll have a taste of what everyone who has sat in on the Gomery Show knows, but Canadians-at-large can't be trusted with. It's pretty bad, but hardly a surprise. It will also get a lot worse, if you're a Liberal.

The Bloc smells blood in the water and would force an election tomorrow, if they could. The Conservative approach is much more sensible and measured. Let's let Gomery do his job. Let's take the testimony out from behind a silly and ineffectual publication ban. Let's allow Canadians to judge the full depth and breadth of Liberal corruption and, then, let voters pass their judgment at the polls.

The Eighth Commandment is pretty simple - "Thou shalt not steal." The O.J. defence won't work. The glove fits. Wear it like a man (or woman) and take your lumps.

The chair had it coming.

2005-03-22T21:03:00.000-08:00

Anyone who attended last weekend's convention in Montreal and didn't come away a proud and re-invigorated Conservative, is a Liberal. In fact, Liberals were conspicuous by their presence. The likes of Stephen LeDrew (without a bow tie), Ruby Dhalla, Scott Reid (the other one), Young Liberal Communications Chair, Corey Pike, and many others prowled the convention floor, bars and hospitality suites, looking for free booze and hidden agendas. They came away with free booze and their hands full of clear and unambiguous Conservative policies and a preview of their future demise.

The media were there en masse, poised and ready to pounce on any massive crack that was sure to open up over some critical issue. They were getting cranky and desperate on Friday, until Peter MacKay let his Irish get the best of him (his words). Ahah, they knew it was all a sham and that the new party would disintegrate before their poised Blackberrys and microphones. Many of them made light of what was one of the finest political speeches that any of them had heard. While Stephen Harper waxed very eloquent, the media frothed excitedly about how the conflict between Peter MacKay and Scott Reid (the other, other one) would end it all.

Imagine their disappointment on Saturday when Mr. MacKay calmed down and delegates collectively made the mature decision to take away any potential disagreement over Constituency representation. It was a pattern that would repeat itself many times, as the Conservative Party of Canada showed that it has gelled very quickly into a credible government-in-waiting.

Oh well, they always had Elsie Wayne who was either ranting enthusiastically against baby-killers or baking cookies for our troops. Every party needs one. Elsie, that is.

There was lots of debate and discussion, on the floor and in the corridors, over many items of policy and constitution. At times, it was passionate and it was always interesting. And it always ended in a conclusion that almost everyone could accept. Like any union, no one got everything that they wanted, but everyone got a package that they could support. Civil disagreement and rational debate is the prerequisite for progress. Some media pointed to debate as a sign of division; while others pointed to agreement as a sign of weakness and capitulation. I guess that means that we can't ever win some things, and that we probably got it about right.

Delegates were progressive enough to take away many of the issues that the Liberals had successfully lied about in the 2004 election, such as abortion, euthanasia and bilingualism. I'm sure they'll still find something to lie about, but that's just who they are. There are many social issues on which Canadians will never reach consensus in a thousand years. Politically, we simply need to disagree respectfully and move on to things that will have more impact on Canada's future.

Delegates from the West and Ontario reached out to Quebec and the Maritimes on several issues and stood fast on others. For the most part, both sides seemed happy with what they'd been able to win or conserve.

The tightest vote of the convention was the one that rejected a separate youth wing for the Party. It had been the most spirited sideshow of the weekend, befitting the energy and passion of youth, and a lot of elbows were bent and arms twisted before the decision was made. In my view, it was a good decision and will mean that young members are given all the same rights, privileges and status as older members. True to form, young Liberals were circling like vultures and pounced with pre-prepared propaganda inviting young Conservatives to defect. Hopefully, our younger members will appreciate that when you win a vote, democracy works and, when you lose a vote, democracy still works.

I came away with a deepened appreciation of the quality, dedication, tolerance and inclusiveness of the new Conservative Party of Canada. At the end of it all, most media had to admit that the Conservative movement in Canada had come a long way. We have the courage to debate difficult issues in public and the maturity to accept compromise. We have a leader at full throttle; backed up by a young, smart and diverse Caucus; and working with a solid policy platform and constitution that will appeal to Canadians, if not Liberals.

We also elected a strong National Council to administer the Party under the leadership of a strong President. Some media even tried to portray the latter internal Council vote as a division between East and West, which is rubbish.

The long and short is that we're ready. The parties were good and the Party is strong. But wait, dammit, I forgot about the most important and devastating moment of the whole affair. Just when we thought we were out of the woods, the shocking truth was revealed that Stephen Harper kicked a chair. I'm not sure that I have the strength to carry on. Or maybe, like the Liberals, the chair just had it coming.

Will tragedy teach us anything?

2005-03-13T07:40:00.000-08:00

The national mourning period for Constables Gordon, Johnston, Myrol and Schiemann is over; but the real mourning by family and friends will go on forever. It is now time that Canadians took a closer look at how we got to the point where an obviously dangerous person was allowed the freedom to continually defy lawful authority, threaten any and all with violence, and possess the lethal weapons necessary to murder four RCMP officers doing their duty.

Various groups will jump on their respective band wagons about the gun registry, or legalizing marijuana, or cracking down on grow ops, or funding for law enforcement, or the justice system, or whatever. Some good points will be raised and some hysteria will be evident. I'll try to do the former but, for me, the bottom line is James Roszko. It's not specifically about the guns, or the marijuana grow op, or the chop shop. It is, specifically, about James Roszko and the inability of the justice system to protect society against people like him.

Governments have hidden behind feel-good laws and programs, and deluded themselves and Canadians into thinking that they are protecting us. They are not, and until Canadians collectively wake up to that reality, we will keep sliding down the slope that Government has created in this area, as they have in many other areas, such as national defence and international security.

The Wendy Cukiers of the world will wag their fingers and say, "See, we told you we need stronger gun control laws". They will ignore the obvious and that is that this incident is a prime example of why the firearms registry is so fatally flawed and utterly useless. If Roszko's guns were registered (which I doubt), why was someone so obviously dangerous allowed to possess them? But, then again, Hell's Angels leader Mom Boucher was allowed to register his arsenal, no problem. If Roszko's guns were not registered (which I suspect), then what's the point? Dangerous people like Roszko will always have access to dangerous weapons and we need to concentrate on ways to get people like him off the street. It's not the gun, stupid, it's the person with his finger on the trigger.

Those who think that we should simply legalize marijuana will point to this and say that, "If marijuana was legal, the RCMP wouldn't have had to be there in the first place." Rubbish. Even if marijuana were legal, Roszko's "enterprise" would not be. Even if marijuana was legal and Roszko couldn't make money off it illegally, he would be doing something else, like crystal meth. It's not the marijuana, stupid; it's the guy dealing it.

Government has failed in their basic duty to provide safety and security for its citizens in some very fundamental ways. They reacted to a horrific crime by a deranged individual by blaming the weapon, rather than the killer. They brought in a firearms registry that does nothing about stopping the Marc Lepines, instead criminalizing law-abiding Canadians. They stick to their guns (pun intended), despite an almost incomprehensible escalation in costs, to very little positive effect.

This Government and the Ministers responsible simply cannot admit a mistake, apologize, and get on with doing their jobs properly. They say that they have limited future spending on the firearms registry. That is simply a lie. They have just diverted funding through other departments or called it something else.

One thing that doing their jobs properly would entail, in this case, is diverting the millions (and billions) wasted on the firearms registry to providing more funding for the RCMP. Like the Canadian Forces, the RCMP has been starved for funding for many years. Like the members of the Canadian Forces, the members of the RCMP continue to loyally and courageously do the best they can, in spite of the lack of Government support. They do it because they love their country and their community; and they have a sense of duty that most Canadians haven't even dreamed about.

The RCMP is undermanned and this played a role in the tragedy at Mayerthorpe. Off duty members were called in to assist; were they properly prepared? Although all members are well trained; like the Canadian Forces, the RCMP is suffering from reduced experience levels. What role did that play? The RCMP also suffers from a lack of adequate equipment, such as body armour that will withstand something more powerful than a handgun. I'm sure that all the decisions made that day were deemed to be appropriate by those who made them.

I suspect that a thorough investigation will expose many areas, such as equipment, training, experience, operational intelligence, and legal limitations to action, that conspired to make this a tragedy. Many of them will be rooted in inadequate funding. The Government will huff and puff about how much they value and support the RCMP. They will portray legitimate questions by anyone in Opposition as being somehow disloyal to the Force. They will refuse to talk about an on-going investigation for fear of jeopardizing their work - read, for fear of having blame laid where it belongs. In the end, the Minister of Public Safety will present the findings in a less than forthright manner, designed not to fix the problem, but to exonerate the Government. And, nothing will change.

Besides being starved for funding, the RCMP and all other law enforcement agencies are trapped in a justice system that has thwarted their efforts at providing public safety and has placed the rights of the criminal ahead of the public good. This has been largely the result of manipulation of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms by the legal profession and over-the-top civil libertarians. Before I get hung for such sacrilege, let me say that this is not a blanket condemnation of the Charter, lawyers, or civil libertarians. It is a blanket condemnation of those who abuse the Charter for profit or ride personal hobbyhorses at the expense of the public good. I also understand that "public good" can have many personal definitions.

When we have people like James Roszko, who had a long list of convictions for violent offences and very little jail time, as a result, there is clearly a breakdown in the principles of crime and punishment. It's easy to look back and declare Roszko a dangerous offender, but the evidence was clear before his final crimes.

During the last election, a corrections officer with nearly thirty years experience approached me. He had dozens of documented examples of the rights of violent criminals overriding the safety of both the officers involved and the public. Officers were not allowed to be armed when escorting convicted murderers on hospital visits outside the walls. Officers were not allowed to wear knife-proof vests; for fear that the inmates might think that they weren't trusted. The topper was the guy who had been let out on statutory release eight times after being sentenced to a collective thirty-seven years in prison for violent crimes, including the murder of another inmate. On his way to see me, the officer learned that this obviously extremely dangerous criminal had just been released for the ninth time. I haven't tracked the guy, but I suspect that he's back in jail after another violent crime and another conviction, just waiting to be released for the tenth time on an unsuspecting public.

I think that we all, including the Government, know who are the good guys who are the bad guys. What Government has done, with our tacit approval, is to allow the forces of irrational niceness to dictate public safety based on warm and fuzzy (and dangerous) liberal notions. The RCMP and other police forces are suffering the results of decades of such policies in their continuing commitment to selflessly do their duty on our collective behalf. By allowing Government to get away with it, we are all guilty of letting down the RCMP and police forces, in general.

We have three choices. Force this Government to fund law enforcement adequately and rescue the justice system from the grip of niceness. Or, exchange this Government for one that will. Or, accept that the inmates have taken over the asylum we lovingly call Canada and hunker down to life under an illusion of public safety. Because Option One will never happen, and Option Three is unacceptable, I vote for Option Number Two. How about you?