How It's Done: Harper, Suppressing Free Speech, Hansard: CN - BC Rail, Harnessing MSM, Government Agencies, Public Corporations Etc.

The knives are out for Stephen Harper, described as "NOT corruptible"; therefore, he is viewed--in certain quarters--as highly undesirable to lead Canada.

The combination of mainstream media, the various arms of government and private interests coalesce to maintain the status quo. This is the danger; democracy in Canada is in grave danger and your government and those who stand to benefit, whether federal, provincial or private have fallen into line.



Using the Elections Act to Stifle Free Speech -- to Prevent Information from Emerging and the People from Knowing

daily KOS -- or FEC Project: Let's Not Become Canada, Eh? by acbonin, Fri May 20th, 2005 at 07:50:20 PDT. -- via Captain's Quarters: Is Harper Finished?

I recently came across this May 12 article about our Neighbours To The North, which I wanted to scare share with you all:

VANCOUVER - Elections B.C. is having a hard time keeping up with a boom of bloggers who are publishing partisan messages during the current election campaign.

They're supposed to register themselves as advertising sponsors if they post a partisan position on a candidate, party, or referendum question.

"Under the Election Act, it will fall within the definition of election advertising, and we would ask them to register," says Jennifer Miller, of Elections B.C. . . .

That's not sitting well with bloggers like Mike Culpepper of Nelson [BC], whose website advocates the "no" side of the referendum on the single transferable vote.

He says Elections B.C.'s definition of blogs as advertising is akin to calling a letter to the editor advertising.

And he says that going after bloggers sends a chill over the right to free speech. "If you start looking on each person as an advertiser, then you begin to suppress political debate."

If you read nothing else, check the links. See how to shut down free speech? Bloggers will be targetted; make no mistake about that. Go to Captain's Quarters / dailyKos and follow the links to the petition to protect free speech.

Then, consider Paul Martin's over the top congratulations to himself for buying time. Why did he feel that the Liberals' bare squeaking through was such a victory? What did he and his, along with others, stand to lose? What do you suppose is behind his totally unseemly behaviour lately? There is more to this than at first appears, I would guess.



Calling American Bloggers:

Help Canadians report on what is actually going on in Canada. A coalitiion of those who have more to gain by supporting this government than in investigating and reporting the truth means Canadians have few outlets reporting and hence, little means of learning how things are done, how democracy is thwarted in Canada.



The following is the kind of thing that ordinary Canadians should have known much more about. Perhaps I missed it, but I do not thing our MSM have done a credible job reporting to the rest of Canada on little deals involving their $$$ that may--I believe will--benefit some powerful and connected individuals.

Example: CN is a Crown Corp.; yet, while receiving public money, the Canadian citizenry are not privy to much information. Read the excerpt that follows with this in mind: which of the following are involved?

* ports,
* LNG terminal(s),
* pipeline(s),
* shipping
* business expansion in BC,
* Canada-China business and business networks,
* expansion of business preparatory to the 2010 Olympics. . . and afterward?

and one would be remiss in not mentioning

* friends in government

The Big Question: Who are providing the private money mentioned here and who benefit?

Note: I have not put the following in blockquotes as I usually do when quoting source material.

Hansard: 2004 Legislative Session: 5th Session, 37th Parliament -- B.C. RAIL SPENDING ON MAINTENANCE AND OPERATIONS MAY 18, 2004, Volume 25, Number 16, [ Page 11199 ] -- Additionally, you might want to follow that link for these; I have not read them but the subjects seemed intriguing in light of current news. "Impact of government policies on airport authorities" and possibly "Destination ImagiNation competition"

J. MacPhail: Three days until this place shuts down until the fall, three days until the government can hide from questions on B.C. Rail, and I'm sure they're all relieved. But before the cabinet heads off for the barbecue circuit for the summer, maybe the Premier can tell this House how much money B.C. Rail is spending right now to spruce up operations before the Premier hands it over to CN for 990 years.

Hon. G. Campbell: As you know, Mr. Speaker, the B.C. Rail investment partnership agreement is before the competition board. At the time when that is complete, everyone will have all of that information. [Did you think you were hearing Scott Brison? I did.] In terms of what B.C. Rail is doing, it's trying to keep an ongoing operation that works for its shippers, and that's what we would expect it to do as we go through this transition period.

Mr. Speaker: The Leader of the Opposition has a further question.

J. MacPhail: Well, isn't that interesting? An ongoing operation. Here's what we know. The government has spent $14 million, much of it on lawyers and spin, preparing for the handover of B.C. Rail to CN, the new owner. But until today we didn't know that B.C. Rail is also spending $1 million a month on upgrades, including brand-new B.C. Rail trucks and vehicles before CN takes control. In fact, these vehicles are labelled as non–revenue generating, but they're shiny, they're new, and they're big.

Again to the Premier: can he tell the House why B.C. Rail is spending hundreds of thousands of dollars on a taxpayer-financed gift to CN in the form of brand-new B.C. Rail trucks and vehicles?

Hon. G. Campbell: I'm sure the member opposite would understand this. When there's a transaction that takes place, B.C. Rail has an ongoing operation and maintenance of its fleet. That's part of what the agreement would obviously have expected. You wouldn't have expected B.C. Rail to close down while we worked through the completion of this agreement. But let me say that within the next few days, I'm sure this agreement will be completed.

Within the next few days, there will be a billion dollars of private sector investment that will come into British Columbia. Within the next few days, we will begin opening up the north to opportunities, to passenger rail service, to gateway service in Prince George, to a new Prince Rupert terminal and port that will open up huge opportunities to Peace River farmers. Tourism will benefit. Northern communities will benefit. Regional communities will benefit.

Mr. Speaker, I can tell you this. The B.C. Rail investment partnership is going to make a huge difference in the future of British Columbia.

[1420] Jump to this time in the webcast" [Go to the site for this. NJC]

J. MacPhail: This is the government that said this deal would be done by March 31, 2004. This is a government that doesn't have a clue what's happening at B.C. Rail right now.

Here's the expenditure document for April 2004. According to this April 2004 status report…. It's about B.C. Rail capital spending. It was leaked to the opposition.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Order, please, hon. members. Let us hear the question.

J. MacPhail: In the first four months of this year, B.C. Rail has spent $675,000 on brand-new vehicles for its yards, vehicles that are listed as non-revenue vehicles — pricey present to CN, a company that I'm sure can afford to buy its own shiny new trucks. It's just one more example of the B.C. Liberals keeping costs secret about how much this B.C. Rail deal is costing taxpayers. They're predicting that they will spend $1 million on these shiny new trucks. Again to the Premier…

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Order, please.

J. MacPhail: …are these brand-new rail yard trucks and vehicles part of the contract of sale with CN, or did the government buy these for CN as another taxpayer-financed token of appreciation for helping B.C. Liberals break their election promise?

Hon. G. Campbell: You know, I think the member opposite clearly doesn't understand that capital upgrade and maintenance budgets are part of an ongoing operation. The ongoing operation of B.C. Rail is obviously critical as we move forward. [If you are virtually giving away BC Rail, why would this be necessary? NJC]

Let me just say to the member opposite that the great thing about the B.C. Rail investment partnership is that the taxpayers won't have to pay a million dollars a month to upgrade equipment. The taxpayers won't have to invest in an upgrade of the system, because the private sector will be doing that. The private sector will be creating jobs in British Columbia.

Who are the private sector players? Make an educated guess; then start digging.

---