Bud: Senate -&- IMET, Trust-Poll

Rethinking the Senate

My gut response when I hear the word "Senate" is, to paraphrase Herman Goering's comment on "culture", to reach for a *** (registered, of course). However, there have been cases where the Senate has opposed the worst kinds of Liberal legislation. The best is when the Senate investigated marijuana to assess the damage done by it, versus the damage done by the draconian legislation against it. Probably channelling the LeDain Commission's report in 1972, they came to the same conclusion, legalize it. This wasn't what Irwin Cotler, or the other nervous Nelly Liberals wanted to hear in a minority government situation, so the report was shelved. This was a balanced report, which showed a brilliant insight into a King Canute attempt by the Liberals to suppress its use. This progressive conclusion came from a bunch of Senators, who grew up believing the movie "Reefer Madness". [Now, just a minute Bud, be careful how you use that word "progressive". NJC]

Then there was Ann Cools' drive to make the Divorce Act more gender neutral. For years, we have seen the male-unfriendly Family Courts ignore the plight of men cut off from access to their children by vindictive wives. The Family Courts' response has been to do nothing or to make sporadic attempts at enforcing their own judgements only. Ranged against Cools is a phalanx of government pressure through using taxpayer-funded feminist groups, who are quite pleased with this imbalance. Throw in feminist judges and you have state-sanctioned injustice operating. Cools wanted real, equal justice to be the guiding light in such devastating family conflicts. Through her efforts, she actually affected some important new improvements to Family Law.

In both cases, the Senate took on major social issues which the government didn't have the nerve to touch. That is the advantage of having Senate tenure. That said, there are still too many Senators who hit the snooze button all day. Perhaps an open discussion of where potential Senators stand on important social issues would be beneficial. It is not the Senate's function that is in doubt, but rather who in it will stand for what is right and just. There has to be a more open way of selecting candidates. I have unpacked my ***--for now.

© Bud Talkinghorn

I hasten to add, Bud is not serious about his ***. It's all tongue in cheek -- just in case. NJC



Al Jazeera is going to pull a CNN and go international in English. Motto: "All terror, all the time. Beheading recaps at six." Bud



A must read article

Justice Department undermining RCMP fraud squads, say documents -- IMET Dean Beeby, Ottawa Citizen / CP, Mar. 19, 06

OTTAWA -- The RCMP's new market fraud teams were supposed to nail more corporate thieves by bringing together hard-nosed cops, financial sleuths and savvy prosecutors. [....]

Search: $$$ , RCMP Supt. John Sliter, director of the IMETs , federal-provincial relations , Greg Sorbara, Ontario's former finance minister , Sorbara's lawyer , Royal Group Technologies file



Lorrie Goldstein: SATIRE IS NOT DEAD Mar. 19, 06

When you totally screw up in Canada there's only one of two things you can do. You can pick yourself up, dust yourself off, hold your head high and walk quietly off into the sunset, preserving what little dignity you have left.

Or you can write a column for the Globe and Mail. [. . . . ]

Thanks, R, for my laugh.



Trust........

You really have to read the fine print.

The occupations most-trusted by Canadians, according to a poll by Leger Marketing: ....... CTV, Mar. 19 2006 via newsbeat1

I have not included the actual header for this, which is very misleading--that judges beat another group--check the actual list for the ranking in trust level for each ..... The header could have been quite different. Would that not have fitted someone's political purpose? Try unionists (e.g. Buzz Hargrove) vs farmers, judges vs. police officers, publicists vs nurses, politicians vs pollsters (a mistake here?) -- any combination you like for these occupations.

Nurses [These occupations are included but I've mixed them up. ]
Senior public servants
Farmers
Unionists
Firefighters
Pollsters
Teachers
Lawyers
Judges
Notaries
Police Officers
Bankers
Engineers
Car salespeople
Real estate agents
Church representatives
Doctors
Economists
Politicians
Insurance brokers
Journalists
Publicists