Ottawa ordered to provide all residential schools documents

The federal government is obliged to turn over its archival records on Indian residential schools to the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, an Ontario court decided Thursday.

In his decision, Justice Stephen Goudge said the obligation to provide the materials is clear from the settlement agreement that established the commission.

"The plain meaning of the language is straightforward," Goudge said. "It is to provide all relevant documents to the TRC."

The decision comes in an increasingly acrimonious dispute between Ottawa and the commission over millions of government documents the commission says it needs to fulfil its core mandate.

'The court's answers to the commission's reference will ensure that the dark chapter in Canadian history that is the residential school story will never be forgotten'—Julian Falconer, lawyer for the commission

The government maintained it had no obligation to provide the records in Library and Archives Canada.

The commission, under Justice Murray Sinclair, argued Ottawa's intransigence would make it impossible to complete its work on budget as required by July 1, 2014.

"We're grateful to be able to continue the commission's work of gathering and protecting for future generations documents that are relevant to the history of the Indian residential schools," Sinclair said in a statement.

"We especially acknowledge the clarity of Justice Goudge's decision."

Part of the commission's mandate is to help in a process of reconciliation, while yet another is the "creation of a legacy" that includes collection of records, taking statements from those involved, and classifying and preserving the materials.

"Canada's documents, wherever they were held, would have been understood as a very important historical resource for this purpose," Goudge said.

Aboriginal Affairs Minister John Duncan said the government was reviewing the decision.

"The decision is anything but clear-cut," Duncan told the House of Commons during question period Wednesday. "The discussion in terms of relevant documents is left somewhat open by the judge. We believe that we've been meeting the spirit and intent [of the agreement], but if there is a slightly different interpretation we will meet the spirit and intent of the judge's decision."

150,000 native kids sent to schools

The residential schools system, which ran from the 1870s until the 1990s, saw about 150,000 native kids taken from their families and sent to church-run schools under a deliberate policy of "civilizing" First Nations.

Many students were physically, mentally and sexually abused. Some committed suicide. Mortality rates reached 50 per cent at some schools.

In the 1990s, thousands of victims sued the churches that ran the schools and the Canadian government. The $1.9-billion settlement of that suit in 2007 prompted an apology from Prime Minister Stephen Harper and the creation of the commission.

In its submissions to the court, the commission argued the Canadian government was trying to renege on its legal deal with Aboriginal Peoples because sticking to the terms would cost too much.

Commissioners Marie Wilson, from left, Justice Murray Sinclair and Chief Wilton Littlechild released an interim report last February. The commission must wrap up its work by July, 2014. (Darryl Dyck/Canadian Press)

Lawyer Julian Falconer, who represented the commission, called it a "truly landmark" judgment.

"The court's answers to the commission's reference will ensure that the dark chapter in Canadian history that is the residential school story will never be forgotten," Falconer said.

In opposing the court application, the federal government argued the commission had no legal standing to take the matter to court.

It also maintained its only obligation was to throw open the doors to the Library and Archives Canada to commission researchers.

Goudge disagreed on both counts.

"While Canada is not obliged to turn over its originals, it is required to compile all relevant documents in an organized manner for review by the TRC," the justice said.

Goudge also weighed in on the dispute over what constitutes "relevant" documents, saying not every document that mentions residential schools is key to the commission's mandate.

An evaluation of relevance is context specific and the obligation on the government to produce documents must be reasonable.

"Suffice it to say that Canada's obligation ... is to provide the documents in its possession or control that are reasonably required to assist the TRC to tell the story of the legacy of Indian residential schools," Goudge said.

Residential schools documents ruling (PDF)
Residential schools documents ruling (Text)

21.16 | 0 komentar | Read More

Polluters to face greater liability for offshore drilling spills

The federal government is set to bring in a new law to make resource companies pay more if they have a spill during off-shore drilling.

Environment Minister Peter Kent told reporters this week his government is about to bring in "significant" changes to liability for polluters.

He wouldn't go into details but said there is a need for change.

"I can't break cabinet confidence, but I can assure you we are well aware, not only as it pertains to diversifying markets and increased pipeline traffic, but in terms of liability for offshore drilling," Kent said Tuesday.

Sources familiar with the process say the federal government has been consulting with resource companies and environmental groups about the new legislation. Minister of Natural Resources Joe Oliver is taking the lead and is expected to go to cabinet for approval by the spring.

The sources also said the new law is a result of growing government concern over public protests against resource projects such as the Northern Gateway Pipeline, and the feeling that there's a need to reassure the public it won't be on the hook for possibly billions of dollars to clean up any future oil spills.

It's not clear what the new caps will be in Canada, but sources have told CBC News the government is promising to bring in a "world-class system" with liability caps "in the billions."

Right now there is no cap on liability where a company is at fault or there is proof of negligence. But where there is no negligence involved there is a $30-million cap on liability for companies drilling offshore in the Atlantic and $40 million for companies drilling in the Arctic. Any costs incurred over that amount would be paid by taxpayers.

But the huge cleanup costs for recent events like BP's Deepwater Horizon spill in the Gulf of Mexico have prompted new discussions about company liability.

Recent estimates for the cleanup costs of that spill are more than $40 billion US.

Travis Davies, of the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers, said his organization has been consulted but said the industry group hasn't decided what the new liability caps should be.

"We are working with our members to determine a position on changes to the existing regime and once we've worked through that process we hope to be consulted further when/if government determines what changes are being contemplated," Davies said in an email to CBC News.

Oliver touts 'polluter-pay'

Oliver, who is still away from work recovering from heart surgery, responded to CBC News in an email that the changes are a priority for his government.

"Our more recent initiatives to increase environmental protection include increasing the number of inspections of federally regulated pipelines by 50 per cent, doubling the number of annual audits, a requirement for double-hulled tankers, mandatory pilotage of vessels and enhancing requirements for navigational tools," Oliver wrote.

"In Canada, the foundation of our environmental liability regime is polluter-pay. Our government is committed to periodically assessing financial liability to make certain that Canada's polluter-pay system remains among the strongest in the world."

That's probably not going to convince environmental groups to support it. Organizations such as Ecojustice have been pushing for unlimited liability for resource companies, arguing that all cleanup costs should be paid by the companies.

"Oil companies should face unlimited absolute liability for spills, in accordance with the polluter-pays principle," said Will Amos, an environmental lawyer with Ecojustice.

"The industry's dirty little secret is that oil spills can never fully be cleaned up. The oil and environmental devastation that accompanies an offshore spill lingers forever."

The timing of the new liability law is probably no accident.

The Federal Environment Commissioner is bringing out a new report next week that includes an in-depth look at the federal systems in place to protect taxpayers against the costs of accidents in the mining, nuclear, offshore oil and gas, and marine transportation sectors.

By drafting this new law, the government can say in response to the commissioner's report that it is "working on it."

Corrections and Clarifications

• A subheadline on a previous version of this story said the government promised a liability system with liability caps in the billions. In fact, the government has not outlined the details of the liability cap. Jan. 30, 2013 | 7:37 p.m. ET

21.16 | 0 komentar | Read More

NDP move on Clarity Act reveals delicate balancing act

New Democratic Leader Tom Mulcair came under fire this week from all political fronts after tabling a private member's bill dealing with the always touchy issue of Quebec sovereignty.

The bill's proponents say it puts the clarity back into the "Clarity Act" passed by the Liberal Government in 2000 following the heart-stopping result of the 1995 Quebec Referendum.

Opponents say the NDP is playing a dangerous game pitting the interests of its nationalist base in Quebec against the interests of Canadians.

The NDP leader passionately defended his federalist credentials Wednesday.

NDP Leader Tom Mulcair says his party is seeking to clarify ambiguity in the Clarity Act, which sets conditions for a referendum and negotiations for separation from Canada. (Sean Kilpatrick/Canadian Press)

"I was there in the 1980 Referendum, I fought in the trenches, ... I know what it's like to fight for Quebec in Canada; my whole career has been about that. So nobody can question me on that."

Still, the NDP bill attempts to bridge that fault line that continues to exist between Canada's two official language groups – particularly when it comes to the national question.

The bill sets out to define an acceptable question for any future referendum on sovereignty in Quebec.

But it also sets out how much of a majority would be enough to launch negotiations for the separation of Quebec from Canada, at 50-per-cent-plus-one.

The proposal is not new for the NDP. It was part of the party's 2005 "Sherbrooke Declaration."

"Some people are shocked that we have the courage of our convictions, but it's the only way to do politics," Mulcair told journalists following a caucus meeting Wednesday.

"We have a positive constructive offer on the table, and compared to the Liberal (Clarity Act) law; ... that has no clarity on the numbers, and no clarity on the question. We clarify these two elements. And we want to make sure that we find the winning conditions for Quebec and Canada."

Other parties reacted harshly.

On Wednesday, interim Liberal leader Bob Rae told reporters, "what (Mulcair) is proposing is bad for Quebec and Canada and the future of Canadian democracy. And there is a complete and total incoherence in the proposal they're suggesting."

Earlier in the week, Justin Trudeau, frontrunner in the Liberal leadership race, went further while campaigning in Alberta, telling reporters "You cannot be half-pregnant on the question of Canadian unity."

"(Mulcair's) willingness to equivocate, his willingness to be open to a 50-per-cent-plus one vote on sovereignty takes us back in a direction that we don't want to go. It's a very careful political calculation by him to appease his strong nationalist base in Quebec," Trudeau said.

Christian Paradis, one of the few remaining Conservative Quebec MPs, also dismissed the private member's bill Wednesday, saying Canadians are not interested in opening up old battles.

The NDP and the Bloc

The key to understanding the politics of all this is the context. Before the end of the last session, Bloc Québécois MP André Bellavance introduced his own private member's bill, C-457, "an Act to Repeal the Clarity Act."

It would have forced the NDP to decide whether to abandon the principals of its own "Sherbrooke Declaration" or vote with the Bloc while the rest of Parliament howled.

Not liking the choice, the NDP introduced its own private member's bill Monday; the very same day debate began on the Bloc bill.

'The challenge for (Mulcair) is that what has allowed the NDP to become the Official Opposition is Quebec, but governing will involve the rest of Canada'—Luc Turgeon, University of Ottawa

It's important to note that the legitimacy of the sovereignty option and Quebecers' right to self-determination is important even for many Quebec federalists. Defence of the concept of 50-per-cent-plus-one, therefore, is widely considered simply an acknowledgement of Quebecers' right to choose their own destiny.

"It's an issue of principle," says Luc Turgeon of the University of Ottawa's school of political science. In fact, he points out 50-per-cent-plus-one is the position of the federalist Liberal Party of Quebec.

"It's accepted by sovereigntists and federalists."

Turgeon suggests many Quebecers may even understand that to get international recognition, they may need a much clearer majority.

But they also want Canada to acknowledge Quebec's right to decide its own future.

And on that front, the ambiguity of the Clarity Act is seen by some Quebecers as an outstanding sore point.

What is a 'clear majority'?

The Act — which followed a 1998 Supreme Court reference on Quebec secession — calls for a "clear majority" but leaves that majority undefined. Mulcair suggests his private member's bill puts the issue in line with the Supreme Court decision.

But take a closer look at the court's decision.

The panel of judges unanimously decided: "The Reference requires us to consider whether Quebec has a right to unilateral secession. Those who support the existence of such a right found their case primarily on the principle of democracy. Democracy, however, means more than simple majority rule."

In other words, democracy means more than 50-per-cent-plus-one.

The man who introduced the NDP bill, Toronto-Danforth MP Craig Scott, is so far down the list of House of Commons Members it could take years before anyone gets to debate the bill's content, and an election could kill it before then.

But perhaps it should be considered in terms of what it says about the delicate position the NDP faces balancing the needs of its majority Quebec caucus and its ambitions in the rest of Canada in the next election.

"The challenge for (Mulcair) is that what has allowed the NDP to become the Official Opposition is Quebec, but governing will involve the rest of Canada," Turgeon says.

Delicate balance

He believes the volatility of Quebec support will be a constant preoccupation for the NDP leader. "But," Turgeon adds, "every day Mulcair spends on the 'national question,' is a bad day for Mulcair."

Turgeon suggests as long as Mulcair sticks to talking about issues shared by potential supporters both in Quebec and the rest of Canada — think, social policy — he can cater to both constituencies.

In the long term, Turgeon suggests Mulcair's positions on the national question could hurt him.

"If sovereignty comes back, then he may not be seen as strong enough against Quebec to protect Canadian interests."

In the short term, the Bloc has already forced the NDP to debate the issue Monday, and is set for another debate later this spring, as well as a vote on second reading.

Surely, the Bloc will be joined by the separatist Parti Québécois, currently leading a minority government in Quebec, in commenting publicly on the NDP's performance.

If the Bloc's goal was to draw the NDP out on the combustible issues dividing Quebec and Canada — mission accomplished.

21.16 | 0 komentar | Read More

Ethics watchdog wants more power to punish lawbreakers

Due to a series of unfortunate vote-related events, the ethics committee was forced to postpone its much-anticipated chat with Ethics Commissioner Mary Dawson, whose testimony this afternoon was to have officially kicked off the five-year review of the Conflict of Interest Act. 

Unfortunately, parliamentary democracy -- specifically, the government's ultimately successful efforts to curtail further report stage debate on the refugee deportation bill -- intervened, and the committee agreed, regretfully but unanimously, to adjourn for the day and call the commissioner back at an unspecified date in the future. 

Dawson's office, however, has obligingly made the her undelivered opening statement available for public perusal. 

On cursory review, she doesn't appear to be pushing for substantial change to the existing ethics regime, although as was the case when she made s similar appearance at the procedure and house affairs committee during its review of the MPs' code of conduct last fall, she does suggest that she might be given the power to impose administrative penalties for serious breaches. 

Dawson also reiterates her recommendation that the threshold for disclosure of gifts received by public office holders be reduced from $200 to just $30. (Her presentation does not, however, extend to musing about calculating the cash value of the Hill reception circuit, a proposal that met with little support when put before the procedure committee. 

As for those potentially controversial rulings on the propriety of ministers and parliamentary secretaries sending bid-supporting letters to the CRTC, her opening statement was silent, presumably, she will expand on her reasoning when the committee gets the chance to grill her in person. 

In any case, you can read her full statement here: 

Ethics Commissioner Mary Dawson - by CBCPolitics

21.16 | 0 komentar | Read More

Royal baby bill set for delivery in House of Commons

Heritage Minister James Moore will unveil Canada's legislation to amend the royal line of succession today, as part of a rare and unprecedented process for ensuring the crown is passed on according to the same rules in 16 countries.

The substance of the legislation is already known. Before Dec. 2, the Harper government provided its written agreement to pass changes consistent with those underway in the United Kingdom and the other 14 constitutional monarchies where Queen Elizabeth is the head of state.

Three changes to the ancient laws that govern the royal line of succession received unanimous agreement at the Commonwealth heads of government meeting in Perth, Australia, in October. 2011:

• Males will no longer inherit the throne ahead of older, female siblings.
• The monarch or a direct heir to the throne will no longer be banned from marrying a Roman Catholic.
• Descendants of George II will no longer need to obtain the monarch's permission to marry or else have their marriage declared void.

The third change is thought to affect several hundred people. It will be replaced with a new requirement for the monarch's consent for the marriages of only the first six people in line to the throne.

All the countries need to amend the same centuries-old acts in the same way to avoid confusion. If they did not, different rules in different countries could see different monarchs across the Commonwealth some day, following the presumed reigns of Prince Charles and Prince William (currently first and second in line to the throne to succeed Queen Elizabeth.)

Synchronized reforms

The potential that Prince William and the Duchess of Cambridge could have a first-born girl as early as this July adds a spirit of urgency to the attempt to modernize the rules, but in fact all the countries have agreed that the changes would apply retroactively to the October 2011 agreement. All the countries will have a common coming into force date for the legislation.

Canada's legislation will fall in line with a bill that passed third reading in the British House of Commons on Monday.

It was fast-tracked by British Prime Minister David Cameron's coalition government following its introduction in December, but may experience a delay as it moves to the upper house at Westminster.

Last week, the constitution committee in the British House of Lords issued a report expressing its dissatisfaction with the fast-tracking, saying the potential "unintended consequences" of the bill warranted more fulsome debate than it received during its quick journey through the House of Commons.

In Canada, the bill set for introduction Thursday could pass without difficulty, thanks to the Conservative majority in both the House of Commons and the Senate. The official Opposition also has expressed early support for the reforms.

Poised for legal debate?

While the substance of the bill may see broad support, the process being used by the Harper government to make the reforms is being questioned in some legal circles.

Each country implementing the changes must act in accordance with its own constitution. In some countries – and the Harper government indicated early on that this includes Canada – legislation is necessary to amend the rules for the Canadian Crown, which has been separate from the British Crown since the passage of the Statute of Westminster in 1931.

The preamble to that statute says that "any alteration in the law touching the succession to the throne ... shall hereafter require the assent as well of the parliaments of all the dominions [including the Dominion of Canada] as of the parliament of the United Kingdom."

Related:

But some scholars also point out that Canada's sovereignty was further enhanced by the patriation of the Constitution in 1982, which outlined detailed amending formulas for Canada's Constitution and repealed some parts of the Statute of Westminster.

The 1982 Constitution Act says that an amendment in relation to the office of "the Queen, the Governor General and the Lieutenant Governor of a province" can be made only where authorized by "resolutions of the Senate and House of Commons and of the legislative assembly of each province."

To date, the Harper government does not appear to have engaged the provinces in any kind of consultation or parallel legislative process to approve of these reforms.

Some argue that the three changes in this bill amount to an amendment in relation to the office of the Queen. But the Harper government says it has a legal opinion from its justice department that this bill is not a constitutional amendment.

Canadian provinces have their own relationship with the Crown through the office of the lieutenant governor, who represents the Queen in each province and ultimately gives royal assent to the provincial legislation passed within the jurisdiction of each province.

In Australia, a dispute between the federal government and the state of Queensland is slowing down efforts to approve the same three changes in a streamlined fashion. Queensland's premier said his state government does not object to the substance of the changes, but wants the process to respect the separate powers of the two jurisdictions.

21.16 | 0 komentar | Read More

$1M spent to ship PM's armoured cars to India

The government says it cost more than $1 million to ship Prime Minister Stephen Harper's armoured cars to and from India for his visit last year.

The information was released after New Democrat MP Peggy Nash filed two written requests for the information. The government is compelled to answer those sorts of questions.

The responses, which were tabled yesterday in the House of Commons, show it cost $1,030,092 for the operating costs of the C-17 Globemaster used to transport the vehicles to India and back

Personnel costs were another $31,356, for a total of $1,061,448.

Using Canadian government aircraft to ship the armoured cars saved at least $460,000, according to a response from the RCMP. The commercial cost would have been as much as $2 million.

Using the military's own "rates per flying hour" estimates for support, amortization and other associated costs, the total cost rises from $21,239 per hour to $36,111 per hour, or $1,751,383.50.

New Democrat ethics critic Charlie Angus said the government "has the nerve to tell senior citizens the cupboard is bare," but spent over $1 million to fly the prime minister's armoured cars to India, despite India's offer of high-security armoured vehicles.

"It was good enough for the prime minister of Australia, but not good enough for our leader. Where is the accountability?" Angus said in question period.

RCMP assessed threats

In his answer, Foreign Affairs Minister John Baird pointed to India's history. The country has seen repeated terrorist attacks, including one in Mumbai in 2008.

"When we look to the security of our prime minister, we consult the experts, those that are experts in security," Baird said. "And when it comes to the national security and the security of our prime minister, we will take advice from the RCMP over the NDP every single time."

Interim Liberal Leader Bob Rae said no one objects to money being spent to ensure the security of Harper or Gov.-Gen. David Johnston when they travel.

"The problem with this expenditure is India is a country where their ministers and others travel in armoured cars," Rae said. "There is a fleet of armoured vehicles in India. So, on this particular case of the vehicles having to be flown over, it's a little hard for me to understand why that was necessary."

The RCMP assessed the operational requirements, including "the protectee, public and officer safety considerations and a threat assessment of events/environment," and determined there were no appropriate vehicles in India, according to the response tabled by Public Safety Minister Vic Toews.

RCMP recommendation

Because it could compromise security for Harper, no information on the selection criteria for the armoured cars would be provided, the response said.

"Given that the RCMP is responsible for the protection of the prime minister, the RCMP made the recommendation and took the final decision on appropriate vehicles and the selection and supply of appropriate transportation, to ensure the safety of the prime minister," the response said.

The prime minister was driven around in a black Chevy Suburban SUV with Ontario plates at his first stop in Agra, India. A second Canadian car, a black Cadillac sedan, met him on his arrival in New Delhi.

The response tabled in the House of Commons shows the C-17 departed Canada on Oct. 29, 2012, and left India for the return trip on Nov. 10, 2012. The total flying time was 48.5 hours.

with files from James Cudmore

21.16 | 0 komentar | Read More

3 Conservative MPs raised concerns about CNOOC-Nexen deal

Three Conservative MPs wrote to the prime minister and the industry minister to raise concerns about the contentious takeover of Calgary-based oil and gas producer Nexen by a Chinese state-run company, the CBC has learned.

Documents obtained by CBC News Network's Power & Politics through Access to Information reveal strong opposition to the $15.1 billion deal from key industry people and the Conservative backbenches.

On Aug. 13, 2012, Kitchener, Ont., MP Harold Albrecht wrote to Industry Minister Christian Paradis to register "philosophical and practical opposition" to the takeover by the China National Offshore Oil Corporation (CNOOC).

"As a conservative, I believe in free and fair trade, and a limited role for governments in the economy," he said. "To allow the China National Offshore Oil Corporation to purchase Nexen would not demonstrate examples of free trade or fair trade."

Albrecht warned that tax dollars could be wasted in the transaction — and that there is no guaranteed access to Chinese markets or "commitment to reciprocity."

"Worse, this is an example of the most unfair trade possible: expecting job-creating entrepreneurs to compete against the full resources of a global superpower that appears able to flout the disciplines of currency markets and the most basic standards of human rights," he wrote.

This week, the closing of CNOOC's takeover of the Canadian oil and gas producer was delayed by another 30 days to March 2, 2013. Because Nexen has assets in the Gulf of Mexico, the purchase must be approved by the Committee on Foreign Investment in the U.S.

The documents show that British Columbia MP Russ Hiebert wrote to Prime Minister Stephen Harper on Aug. 15, 2012, calling for changes to the foreign investment law in order to ensure that Canada had an ability to press for human rights reforms. He insisted the bilateral trade relationship as it exists is not working in Canada's favour.

"I am concerned that our trading and investing relationship with China is one-sided and that an investment proposal of a similar magnitude and nature by a Canadian company in China would simply not be welcomed by the Chinese," he said.

Harper formally approved the Nexen-CNOOC deal on Dec. 7, 2012, but said the trend of takeovers of Canada's oilsands by foreign state-owned firms would not continue. He signalled they would be permitted only in "exceptional" circumstances in future.

"To be blunt, Canadians have not spent years reducing the ownership of sectors of the economy by our own governments, only to see them bought and controlled by foreign governments instead," Harper said at the time.

A third Conservative MP, LaVar Payne of Medicine Hat, Alta., wrote to Paradis Aug. 21, 2012 to raise "grave" concern about the human rights record of China — calling it "far from stellar."

"It is my belief that Canadian laws must prevail, and that if we were to allow a state-owned company of a foreign nation that brutally represses its own citizens to buy a strategic asset here, we would be setting a very dangerous precedent," he wrote. He also flagged potential problems with the "lack of environmental concern" by the regime in Beijing.

"I do believe that the Chinese administration has little to no regard for environmental preservation, and this is another area of concern," he said.

Conservative MPs weren't the only ones raising red flags.

A confidential letter from Canadian Steel Producers Association president Ron Watkins to Paradis warned the takeover could disrupt supply chain relationships and reduce the potential "net benefits" to Canada. He also raised concerns that procurement practices could favour imports from China.

"This is especially a risk vis-à-vis the Chinese steel industry, which features a very high degree of state ownership or control, and a proven record of WTO [World Trade Organization] -inconsistent product dumping and export subsidies in Canada and elsewhere," Watkins wrote.

The Canadian Coalition on Human Rights in China, which represents 15 organizations focused on human rights in Canada's relationship with China, also wrote an extensive letter raising concerns that Canada's foreign policy position on China puts investment goals ahead of human rights. It called on the Harper government to develop benchmarks and timelines for progress.

Cnooc Nexen Letters Atip (PDF)
Cnooc Nexen Letters Atip (Text)

21.16 | 0 komentar | Read More

Belize asks Canada to help fight spillover of Mexican drug war

Spillover from Mexico's violent drug war is prompting the Harper government and the Canadian military to become more involved in helping defend the tiny, Central American country of Belize.

A series of internal reports, obtained by The Canadian Press under the access to information law, show the government has quietly increased co-operation with the Commonwealth nation, formerly known as British Honduras.

Canada is providing non-lethal equipment for security services and helping with strategic planning and the training of soldiers.

The documents, all dated from the spring of last year, describe the situation in Belize as deteriorating in the face of ultra-violent drug cartels that are battling not only Mexican and U.S. law enforcement, but each other as well

"Belize is of growing importance to the Canadian government due to the increasingly precarious security situation in Central America, particularly along the Belize-Mexico border," said a March 23, 2012, briefing note prepared for Defence Minister Peter MacKay.

"Following increasing success to counter transnational criminal organizations in Mexico, these organizations have advanced into Belize, bringing with them violence and public insecurity."

'You can count on Canada to continue working with its partners throughout the Americas to continue to come to terms with that problem, prevent drugs from coming into Canada but also prevent these groups from destabilizing regimes.'—Chris Alexander, parliamentary secretary to the minister of defence

Chris Alexander, the parliamentary secretary to the minister of defence, said today that he wasn't aware of any "new forms of engagement" but that Canada had "an agenda of partnership with many countries."

"You can count on Canada to continue working with its partners throughout the Americas to continue to come to terms with that problem, prevent drugs from coming into Canada but also prevent these groups from destabilizing regimes," he said.

The long coastline, coral inlets and dark, gnarled jungles have been a mecca for tourists over the years, but also perfect cover for cocaine smugglers in fast boats coming up from Colombia.

The increasing cartel focus on Belize prompted U.S. President Barack Obama added the country to the so-called "black list" of countries considered major drug-producing states or transit nations for narcotics.

Pressure on police

Both the internal Defence Department reports and U.S. experts on the drug war in Central America say the small Caribbean Sea nation has become an important thoroughfare for South American drug cartels.

"Many of the countries in Central America and the Caribbean are facing increasing worries and in some cases documented pressure on their law enforcement and justice systems from transnational organized crime groups," said Shannon O'Neil, an adjunct fellow for Latin American studies at the U.S.-based Council on Foreign Relations.

"All of these countries will benefit from strengthening their law enforcement institutions — police, courts, and the like — in the face of these threats."

Eric Olson, associate director of Latin American programs at the Washington-based Wilson Centre, agreed and said the success of anti-drug operations in both the U.S. and Mexico has been overplayed.

To some extent, the shift in drug routes has almost as much to do with cartels battling each other and smugglers looking for easier laneways than with better law enforcement, he said.

"The Belizean security forces are over-matched when it comes to the kind of firepower and capacity that the traffickers have," Olson said.

Help with defence review

The coast guard in that country should be a priority for modernization, given the way smuggling patterns have unfolded, he added.

Engagement in the Americas has been an evolving economic and security priority for the Harper government, said defence officials who spoke on condition of anonymity because they weren't authorized to discuss the matter publicly.

The country's minister of defence requested help from Canada when conducting a strategic defence review in 2011 involving the country's more than 1,050 military, coast guard and national police forces, say the internal documents.

Canada's special forces recently delivered a batch of military equipment, including binoculars, combat clothing, helmets, boots, gloves and other gear.

With files from CBC News

21.16 | 0 komentar | Read More

Canada to provide $13M more for Mali aid

Canada will provide another $13 million in aid to Mali, International Co-operation Minister Julian Fantino announced Tuesday in Ethiopia.

Fantino is the Canadian representative at a donors conference in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia's capital.

"I'm announcing that Canada is providing an additional $13 million to a number of ongoing initiatives aimed at addressing the humanitarian needs that are so pressing," Fantino said at the conference.

Foreign Affairs Minister John Baird repeated the announcement in the House of Commons, pledging that Malians "can count on that support to continue in this difficult period on the road to stability, peace and prosperity."

The most recent numbers available on the website of the Canadian International Development Agency show Canada contributed $109.8 million to Mali in 2010-11. Canadian direct aid to Mali was suspended following a coup last spring, although multilateral aid — provided along with other countries through organizations like the UN — continued.

A statement from the African Union said leaders had raised over $453 million US "aimed at bridging the funding gap to expedite the deployment" of African-led forces in Mali.

The African Union funds raised will also go to enhance the capacities and training of the Malian Defence and Security Forces, the statement said.

Canadian aid not for military

Canada's funding appears to be for humanitarian relief alone, including:

• $3 million for food and nutrition through the UN World Food Program.
• $2.5 million for health care and medical supplies.
• $1 million for hygiene and sanitation promotion through World Vision Canada.

Asked about Canada contributing humanitarian aid rather than the military assistance pledged by other countries at the summit, interim Liberal Leader Bob Rae said politicians need to make the case to Canadians that there are issues of security and governance that affect the whole region. An al-Qaeda-linked group is waging a bloody battle for the country's north.

"It's very important for people to understand that these little terrorist cells grow and they jump from country to country," Rae said.

"And as they grow, they become a greater threat, not only to that country, but to the region and in fact to the rest of the world. There weren't a lot of people in al-Qaeda in 1998, 1999 in Afghanistan and people said well, you know, it's an internal issue for Afghanistan and we're not going to worry too much about that, and I think we saw what the risks were in taking that approach."

Special forces in Mali

Canadian special forces are on the ground in Mali to protect Canadian assets such as the Canadian Embassy in the capital Bamako, Evan Solomon, host of CBC News Network's Power & Politics, reported Monday.

The forces are not related to Canadian Forces crews who have been piloting and supporting a Canadian C-17 transport plane in support of French troops since Jan. 18. That mission was extended last week until Feb. 15.

Late Tuesday, the Department of National Defence issued said the twelfth C-17 flight had departed Bamako and was on its way back to Le Tubé, France, having delivered six armoured vehicles.

So far, the cargo ferried by the C-17 has consisted of aircraft parts, baggage, French passengers and a fuel truck, for a total of 314,158 kilograms over the 12 flights.

The special forces are not there to train Malian troops — and they are not involved in any combat role, as the government has repeatedly stressed and Prime Minister Stephen Harper repeated again Monday in the House of Commons.

A statement earlier this week from the Canadian government said in the last year, Canada has provided:

• Food and nutrition assistance to 1.3 million people in Mali, as well as to 142,000 refugees in Niger, Mauritania and Burkina Faso.
• Water and sanitation assistance to more than 49,000 people.
• Activities such as the screening and referral of children suffering from malnutrition, as well as activities designed to protect livelihoods and enhance resilience, such as the distribution of seeds and tools for 58,000 people; and cash transfers and cash-for-work programming for 3,000 vulnerable households affected by both the food crisis and conflict in northern Mali.

Despite Fantino's announcement earlier in the day, his spokeswoman initially denied Canada had pledged any further funding for the troubled west African country.

"Canada has not announced any humanitarian funds above what is already being implemented. If and when Canada does, I'll ensure you are made aware," Meagan Murdoch said in an email.

Another spokesman from Fantino's office also refused to confirm the announcement, even after being presented with quotes pulled from a recording of the conference.

Canada's Foreign Affairs Minister John Baird issued a statement Tuesday welcoming the adoption of a "roadmap for transition by the Malian National Assembly in Bamako.

"It is important for the country to work toward free and fair presidential and legislative elections. We are pleased that key actors in Mali appear committed to bridge a way forward that will restore democracy, constitutional order and territorial integrity to Mali.

"We are committed to working with Mali and its neighbours to bring about the return of security, stability and democracy for the people of Mali," said Baird's statement.

21.16 | 0 komentar | Read More

Harper speech rallies Conservative caucus

Prime Minister Stephen Harper is speaking to his Conservative caucus on Parliament Hill this morning, articulating the government's agenda as Tory MPs and Senators return from their six-week winter break.

On Monday, Government House Leader Peter Van Loan said that the government's main focus remains the economy, leading up to an anticipated federal budget from Finance Minister Jim Flaherty in March. Van Loan also identified several justice and public safety initiatives the government is keen to pass.

Aboriginal issues dominated the spotlight during Parliament's winter break, but it's not clear the Conservatives intend to spend very much time in the House of Commons dealing with the issues raised in recent First Nations protests. The opposition, however, has made these concerns a focus during this week's first two question periods.

The House of Commons resumed sitting on Monday. The Senate resumes next week.

21.16 | 0 komentar | Read More

NDP will oppose Bloc bill that takes aim at Clarity Act

The NDP will oppose the Bloc Québécois bill to repeal the Clarity Act, the law that mandates a clear question and clear majority in any referendum in Quebec on secession.

Instead, New Democratic Party MP Craig Scott is tabling a private member's bill Monday that would amalgamate the Clarity Act and the NDP's own Sherbrooke Accord.

Debate began Monday on a private member's bill sponsored by the BQ that seems designed, in part, to embarrass the NDP, which wrested away most BQ seats in the last election.

Bill C-457, an Act to Repeal the Clarity Act, was introduced in October by Bloc MP André Bellavance. In support of the bill, Bloc Leader Daniel Paillé wrote a letter to all the party leaders except the Green's Elizabeth May, arguing that since they voted to recognize the Quebec people as a nation in 2006, they must realize that a nation has the right to decide its own destiny in its own way.

BQ MP Andre Bellavance, right, has introduced a private member's bill to repeal the Clarity Act. (SRC/CBC)

In debate Monday, Elizabeth May said, "Every party, other than the Green Party, supported a motion that Quebecers are a nation, and today you are all hoisted with your own petards."

Speaking in the House of Commons Monday, Opposition Leader Tom Mulcair said his party would not support the BQ-backed bill to repeal the Clarity Act, but would propose its own new bill.

The Clarity Act, passed in 2000, was the government's response to the knife-edge margin in the 1995 referendum in Quebec that saw the province come close to beginning the process of splitting from the rest of Canada.

The Clarity Act gives Parliament the authority to decide whether any new referendum on separation contains a clear enough question, and whether any vote is the expression of a clear majority of the will of the people of a province. It further states that secession cannot take place without negotiation with the federal government and the other provinces, as well as First Nations.

The NDP voted in favour of the Clarity Act in 2000, although NDP MPs Libby Davies and Sven Robinson voted against it.

NDP backs '50-plus-1'

The party is on the hot seat now because in 2005 it adopted its Sherbrooke Declaration, which states the NDP would recognize a 50-per-cent-plus-1 vote in a referendum on the political status of Quebec. The declaration was part of the NDP's attempt to make significant inroads into the province of Quebec, which it saw as its path to eventually forming government.

Speaking in defence of the Clarity Act, its author Liberal MP Stéphane Dion asked if 50-per-cent-plus-one is a clear majority, then what could be an unclear majority?

In the 2011 general election, the NDP won 58 of Quebec's 75 seats, and the Bloc was reduced to just four. It was a stunning transferral of power from one party to another, but the Bloc has been buoyed lately by the Parti Québécois' minority victory in the recent Quebec provincial election.

The introduction of a bill that has no chance of passing may be its first shot in flushing out the views of the NDP on whether it backs its own Sherbrooke Accord or supports the Clarity Act.

Although the Sherbrooke Accord firmly states that a majority is 50-plus-1, the Clarity Act does not define what a "clear majority" means.

The new bill tabled Monday by the NDP will state that 50-per-cent-plus-one is a clear majority, if the vote count has been done correctly.

21.16 | 0 komentar | Read More

PM tweets his way through 1st day back in the House

Kady O'Malley has been covering the Hill for more than a decade (yes, really) for a variety of publications. An Ottawa girl (not quite born, but raised), she has a passion for politics that borders on the unhealthy, and has liveblogged her way through hundreds of committee meetings, press conferences, judicial inquiries, budget launches, cabinet shuffles, and even the odd constitutional crisis. Oh, and yes, her Boston Terrier really is named "BlackBerry." For up-to-the-minute bulletins, follow Kady on twitter!

21.16 | 0 komentar | Read More

Canada's royal baby bill risks constitutional complications

The federal government is hoping for speedy and painless delivery of its bill to change the gender rules for royal succession, but there are some complicating constitutional factors that could slow things down.

The legislation, expected to come in the first few weeks after MPs return from their winter break, is a rare and unprecedented example of a Canadian bill crafted in co-ordination with 15 other countries, which all need to do the same thing: take the first wee steps towards modernizing the monarchy.

But a nagging question lurks: Does changing the rules governing the monarchy amount to changing the Canadian Constitution in a fundamental way?

Some believe it does, which makes Prime Minister Stephen Harper's hope for quick passage more of a high-risk procedure in that it might set a precedent in by-passing the provinces on an amendment that some feel requires provincial consent.

Rushing through a change to the office of Queen without due process might also be seen as diminishing the status of the Crown at a time when some of Canada's First Nations are attempting to renew their special relationship with that institution.

The crux of the bill will implement three previously agreed-to rule changes, to end centuries-old practices now viewed as discriminatory:

• male children inheriting the throne ahead of their older, female siblings.
• a ban on a monarch or direct heir to the throne marrying a Roman Catholic.
• the requirement for all descendants of George II to obtain the monarch's permission to marry or else have their marriage declared void.

The third change is thought to affect several hundred people. It will be replaced with a new requirement for the monarch's consent for only the first six people in line to the throne.

Canada's bill will fall in line with legislation now moving through the British Parliament.

U.K. bill went first

British Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg, the Liberal Democrat leader who is Prime Minister David Cameron's coalition partner and the spokesman for the U.K. bill, said during House of Commons debate at Westminster last Tuesday that the current rules have "no place in modern Britain" and "reinforce old prejudices and old fears."

Updating the way the Royal Family self-perpetuates became more of a priority after the 2011 marriage between Prince William and Catherine, Duchess of Cambridge, followed by last fall's pregnancy announcement.

The July due date for a possibly female heir to the throne has focused the minds of governments across the 16 Commonwealth countries where Queen Elizabeth reigns.

Prime Minister Harper was among those who unanimously supported the British initiative to pass common legislation to amend the ancient laws — now hundreds of years old — that set out the rules for royal succession.

Cameron's coalition government went first, fast-tracking legislation introduced on Dec.13. The move was not without risks for a Conservative prime minister in a minority government, who needs to avoid offending his traditional, monarchist base while accomodating the more reformist push of his coalition partners, the Liberal Democrats.

British newspapers have reported that Buckingham Palace is "on board" with the changes, with Clegg saying "extensive discussions were held" about the "very precise" reforms.

The Canadian bill will not mirror exactly the British legislation, but must amend in the same manner the same ancient acts that form the basis of Canada's system of constitutional monarchy.

Canada's legislation was still being drafted earlier this month.

Canada has independent Crown

At the time of Confederation, the British North America Act that joined Canada's first four provinces described them as "federally united into One Dominion under the Crown of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, with a Constitution similar in Principle to that of the United Kingdom."

But Commonwealth countries such as Canada officially got their own heads of state when the British Crown became divisible with the passage of the Statute of Westminster in 1931.

Since they all observed the same rules for the line of succession in the years since, all 16 countries continue to have the same person, Queen Elizabeth, as their monarch.

At the Commonwealth Heads of Government meeting in Perth, Australia, in October 2011, all agreed to act in tandem to modernize the rules.

New Zealand is coordinating the effort so that legislation passed in the separate legislatures all comes into effect simultaneously.

It's not a simple task: while all governments provided their written agreement by Dec. 2 to all three changes, the distinct processes for each to make the changes official have their own possibly tricky elements.

"The steps needed in each realm to implement the agreed changes, including any legislation, depend on the constitutional situation in each realm," explains Rebecca Kitteridge, the secretary of the cabinet and clerk of the executive council in New Zealand, who is working with the U.K. and other countries to coordinate things.

"Those realms that intend to legislate will need to follow their own legislative timetables," she wrote to CBC News. "It is intended that all of the legislation, including the U.K. legislation, will be brought into force at the same time."

Kitteridge confirmed the changes will apply to any baby born after the Oct. 2011 Perth Agreement.

Provinces not weighing in (yet?)

British Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg (l) and Prime Minister, David Cameron (r) laugh during a joint news conference earlier this month. Clegg is the spokesman for the Cameron government's bill to change the royal line of succession. (Peter Nicholls/Pool/Reuters)

For its part, the Harper government does not appear to have consulted with all, or perhaps any, of its provincial counterparts before providing its assurances the rule changes would pass.

"We have not been contacted to date and Ontario has not considered the question of the appropriate process to change succession laws in Canada," Neala Barton, a spokesperson for the Ontario premier's office wrote to CBC News last week.

"That said, we are not aware of any reason why we would oppose changes to succession laws that are necessary to keep Canada in line with changes adopted by the British Parliament."

Any province that wanted to raise a fuss about the need for provincial consultation has a legal precedent to argue: a 2003 ruling from the Ontario Superior Court of Justice found that the 1701 Act of Settlement — one of the ancient laws the bill would amend — is "part of the laws of Canada" and the rules of succession are "by neccessity incorporated into the Constitution of Canada."

And here's the sticking point: section 41 (a) of Canada's Constitution, patriated in 1982, says that an amendment in relation to the office of "the Queen, the Governor General and the Lieutenant Governor of a province" can be made only where authorized by "resolutions of the Senate and House of Commons and of the legislative assembly of each province."

So does that mean reforming the rules about who can be king or queen requires unanimous consent from Canada's provincial capitals?

Saskatchewan's view, shared with CBC News last month, is that this bill doesn't amount to changing the Constitution, in that the Constitution simply defines our monarch as the monarch of England, whoever that is.

Another Atlantic province shares the legal view that provincial consultation is not necessary, because these changes simply maintain the symmetry of succession that currently exists with the United Kingdom and the other realms.

The Parti Québécois government in Quebec — not always a bastion of monarchist support — has yet to join the conversation.

A spokesperson for the federal justice minister said in an email to CBC News following publication of this story that the department's legal advice is a constitutional amendment is not needed for Canada to consent to the proposed changes.

But what about Canada's sovereign Crown? If this spring's process doesn't treat this amendment as a Constitutional reform, does that diminish what the authors of the 1982 Constitution intended?

"I'm not sure the provinces have thought through what kind of precedent it sets," says University of Ottawa professor Philippe Lagassé.

He suggest that if the provinces overlook their constitutional right to weigh in on this matter then that could give the federal government a "free hand to do other things [without the provinces' consent] in the future, citing this as a precedent."

With First Nations raising the historic and legal importance of the Crown in establishing their treaty rights over the course of the recent Idle No More movement, it would be odd for MPs to be seen as diminishing the significance of changes to the Crown's line of succession by not fully consulting on and debating the bill, he suggests.

Lagassé says it would be "inherently dangerous" for Canada to be seen as simply going along with the British legislation.

However, "my sense is that none of the parties see this as a fight worth having," Lagassé says, noting that Opposition Leader Tom Mulcair, despite his Quebec origins, doesn't seem keen to engage.

The constitutional limits of what the federal government has the right to change on its own need to be tested, Lagassé suggests, which could prompt someone to bring a court challenge.

21.16 | 0 komentar | Read More

Canadian special forces on ground in Mali, sources say

Canadian special forces are on the ground inside the troubled West African country of Mali to protect Canadian assets there, CBC News has learned.

The special forces are not there to train Malian troops — and they are not involved in any combat role, as the government has repeatedly stressed and Prime Minister Stephen Harper repeated again Monday in the House of Commons.

The Department of National Defence would not confirm or deny the special forces are in Mali due to issues of security of personnel.

But a spokesperson for Foreign Affairs told CBC News, "Steps have been taken to ensure our mission and Canadian personnel are protected."

Evan Solomon, host of CBC News Network's Power & Politics, reports the special forces on the ground are protecting Canadian assets such as the Canadian Embassy in the capital Bamako, according to sources.

The forces are not related to Canadian Forces crews who have been piloting and supporting Canadian C-17 transport planes in support of French troops since Jan. 18. That mission was extended last week until Feb. 15.

It is not known how many special forces are on the ground in Mali, what are their rules of engagements and what assets they are protecting.

During their training mission in Niger, Canadian special forces learned from their training partners about fighting in a specific region of Niger close to the border with Mali.

Canadian special forces are in Mali to protect Canadian assets, in a mission separate from the Canadian Forces C-17 delivery of French military equipment, seen here and above in Bamako, Mali, on Jan. 17. (DND/Canadian Press)

Maj. Doug MacNair, a spokesman for Canadian Special Operations Forces Command, said that "this information was reported to Canadian Special Operations Forces Command headquarters, and since the passage of such information can serve to minimize both civilian and allied force casualties, the information was relayed to France."

The Canadians were worried apparently that if the fighting spread they might be mistaken as targets — a source said passing the information to the French was simply "prudent."

Opposition NDP Leader Tom Mulcair told Solomon that if the special forces are protecting Canadians, the embassy and embassy staff, that is "simply normal protection" and not military involvement.

Mulcair pointed to the need to avoid a situation such as that in Benghazi, Libya, last summer, when the American ambassador and others were killed during an attack on the U.S. Consulate there.

"We would never want to see something like that — we'd want to have proper protection for Canadian personnel at the embassy.

"We're simply talking about protecting people in the embassy," Mulcair said.

But Mulcair repeated his position that Parliament be consulted before Canada makes any military or combat commitment beyond the C-17 missions.

Children cheer foreign visitors arriving in the streets of Gao, Northern Mali on Monday. French and Malian troops are moving through areas in Mali's north previously controlled by al-Qaeda-linked insurgents. (Jerome Delay/Associated Press)

In response to a question from Mulcair earlier Monday, Harper confirmed Parliament will be consulted on Canada's next steps, but didn't provide any additional details about either military assistance or humanitarian funding Canada may be considering.

"We will not undertake a Canadian combat mission in Mali," Harper told the Commons, reiterating his government's message over the past two weeks.

"We will through this chamber and through committees … be consulting with Parliament on any further steps that need to be taken," the prime minister told MPs in the first Commons sitting after MPs' winter break.

Fantino to attend Mali talks

International Co-operation Minister Julian Fantino is heading to Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, for a high-level international meeting on the conflict in Mali.

African Union chair and Benin President Thomas Boni Yayi, left, met with International Co-operation Minister Julian Fantino earlier this month on Parliament Hill. Fantino is headed to Ethiopia Tuesday for high-level international talks on the conflict in Mali. (Sean Kilpatrick/Canadian Press)

A release from Fantino's office Monday billed the talks as addressing "the financial, logistical and capacity building needs of both the Malian forces and the African-led International Support Mission in Mali."

Asked what he wanted to see from Fantino's attendance at the conference, Mulcair told Solomon that Mali is one of the countries where Canada had been engaged historically, and lamented what he said was the Conservatives' decision to withdraw from Africa recently. He called the government's decision to support French forces in Mali "the right thing to do."

Canada suspended its international development assistance to Mali following a coup in the country last spring, but it has provided humanitarian assistance to vulnerable populations affected by the conflict.

Insurgents affiliated with al-Qaeda now control the country's north. The United Nations Security Council passed a resolution in December authorizing an African-led mission to attempt to restore order in the country and prevent the country's capital, Bamako, from falling to the rebel groups.

The French military intervened earlier this month, with first an aerial bombing campaign and then ground troops in support of the African troops now mobilizing in Mali.

21.16 | 0 komentar | Read More

David Bertschi, an unknown who wants to lead the country

David Bertschi is a member of a club among the federal Liberal leadership candidates — roughly half of them — whose most recent electoral experience, or only one, consists of losing in the last election.

But Bertschi is able to turn his second-place finish in Ottawa-Orléans into an asset. Although he lost to Conservative Royal Galipeau by almost 4,000 votes, he outpolled the three leadership candidates who actually won their seats.

"If you look at the numbers," he said in a phone interview, "When I ran last, 2011, I had more votes than anyone on stage (during the Liberal leadership debate) with me, and I've always been an underdog." He added, " And I had the (NDP) surge and I had robocalls, and I didn't have national media touting the virtues of my lineage."

Bertschi doesn't seem to be deterred by small crowds as he travels the country campaigning. One local media report noted that he met with six people, including his staff, in a coffee shop in Kamloops. "As opposed to large crowds, as the media is promoting, I'm on the ground meeting people and having substantial discussions with them," he said.

His website is impressive, replete with a couple of professionally produced videos entitled Bertschi TV. There is also a section entitled Bertschi gear, although the T-shirts and hoodies with "Team Bertschi" lettering aren't available yet.

"I was born in the small town of St. Adele, Quebec, and from the age of 8 I was raised by a single mother with my younger sisters," he said. He worked a couple of jobs every summer to pay his way through college and then law school.

"For the past 28 years, I've been a civil trial lawyer, a human rights prosecutor and a crown attorney." With his wife, Debbie Orth, also a lawyer, he founded a law firm specializing in insurance. The couple has six children.

Pledges a debt-free campaign

He has pledged to run a debt-free campaign, although he said that the $75,000 entrance fee for the leadership race was "self-funding," meaning he borrrowed from himself. His spokesman Kevin Chalmers explained that since tax receipts for donations can't be issued until registration for the race, borrowing was the only option. Chalmers said that the self-loan will be paid down as the campaign progresses.

Chalmers added that other figures will have to be adjusted as well, such as the two $5,000.00 contributions Bertschi has made to his campaign, as well as a $2,500.00 contribution from his wife, both over the legal contribution limit.

However, Bertschi, like many of the other candidates, refused to say how much money he has fundraised. "Those that release that kind of information historically are trying to squelch the enthusiasm of others," he said. (Justin Trudeau's campaign is reported to have raised $600,000 before the end of 2012.)

A two-camera video of Bertschi's leadership launch shows him shifting between two teleprompters, transitioning seamlessly between French and English, his delivery animated, as he promises "to close tax loopholes" and pledges not to "back down from fighting for Canadian families."

His websites lists six areas in point form under the heading "Restoring the Canadian Advantage." One is what he calls "muscular peacekeeping" as a role for the armed forces. Asked how that concept would have applied to the Afghanistan mission, he said, "We could have been involved in assisting Médecins Sans Frontières, helped organizations rebuilding schools, and helping those that were doing that kind of ... important work."

On his vision for the country, he said, "I believe that Lester B. Pearson had it right. He parked his ego at the door. I'm someone who works with everyone. I put the party first, that's key. Pearson did that, he parked his ego."

On the aboriginal file, he says, he'd appoint a minister who is "substantive" and he'd have an active role himself as prime minister. "I'd also have a special advisor, someone like Paul Martin, who's developed a lot of good will."

He nixed the idea of a merger with the NDP, but, like many other Liberal leadership candidates, favours a preferential ballot.

Bertchi wouldn't say directly if he favours a price on carbon. He said he is for "strong environmental regulations." As for a carbon tax, he said, "I believe that the right carbon pricing system occurs, it'll be considered, but right now I'm focusing on enforcing, strengthening (regulations), and I think everyone's leaning for the sexy solution for everything."

When former Chrétien-era cabinet minister Martin Cauchon decided to run for the leadership at the very last minute, it was Bertschi that organized an emergency roundup of signatures required for the registration. "I thought it would be appropriate to help Martin to get the signatures," he said.

"I don't want to win on a technicality. I want the best people to run against me."

21.16 | 0 komentar | Read More

Ontario premier-designate vows to find 'common ground'

Kathleen Wynne said she is ready to govern in a minority legislature, in her first news conference as newly elected Ontario Liberal Party leader and premier-designate on Sunday morning.

Wynne pledged to get to work right away by holding a first caucus meeting next Tuesday, forming a cabinet and recalling the legislature by Feb. 19.

The new Ontario Liberal leader said she was prepared to work with the opposition parties to find common ground.

"The rancour and the viciousness of the legislature can't continue," said Wynne, adding that her party has to work out the disagreements and build a relationship among the three parties.

But just as Wynne was fielding questions from reporters, the Ontario Progressive Conservative Party released its first attack ad against Wynne in a YouTube video, calling her a "McGuinty Liberal Ontario can't afford."

Wynne "has an expensive record of failure," the attack ad said, citing "big raises to government workers, lost jobs, and reckless overspending."

The PC party intends to run the attack ad on the radio.

"Well, that's their choice … to decide to go negative before we've even begun the next conversation," Wynne told the National. "And it's unfortunate, but that doesn't take me off track."

She said she wants to have a conversation with the Conservatives about how to work in a minority government with them, since she says Ontarians don't want a general election.

At the Sunday news conference, Wynne said "I'm not afraid of debate but what we know is that Ontarians do not want an election."

"They do expect us to lead," she said.

Wynne said the issues that confront Ontarians cut across party lines.

Challenges ahead

The new premier-designate has her work cut out for her as she'll have to recall the legislature after her predecessor prorogued last October.

And with an $11.9-billion deficit on her hands, Wynne will have to balance the books while looking for ways to repair relations with public-service sector workers who have had contracts imposed on them.

For instance, teachers have said they won't return to supervising after-school activities unless the provincial government reopens their contracts.

While finding labour peace was "very high" on her priority list, Wynne also made it clear she will not cave into demands.

"I've been very clear with them that I'm not going to rip up those contracts. But I've also been very clear that we have to engage in a conversation about extracurriculars," Wynne told reporters.

Wynne said social assistance reform and transforming the health-care system were also some of the challenges she would start tackling "within hours."

'The rancour and the viciousness of the legislature can't continue.'—Ontario premier-designate Kathleen Wynne

Despite all the problems she has inherited, Wynne refused to concede the Ontario Liberal brand was hurt and in need of repair.

"We are going to be very clear with the people of Ontario that we understand where there were missteps and where we need to go forward," she said.

Politicians react

Wynne said Tim Hudak, the leader of the Progressive Conservative Party, was the first politician to give her a call after her win.

"I just had a conversation with Tim Hudak and it was great of him to reach out," Wynne told CBC News's Susana Mas on Saturday night.

Wynne also said she looked forward to reaching out to Andrea Horwath, leader of the Ontario New Democratic Party.

Wynne's historic win makes her Ontario's first female and openly gay premier — and the sixth female premier currently in office in Canada.

"That's huge," Wynne said during Sunday's press conference.

Quebec's Premier Pauline Marois had also reached out to her, Wynne said.

Prime Minister Stephen Harper issued a press release after her win on Saturday, saying he looked forward to working with her "on addressing issues that matter to Ontarians, and in particular the creation of jobs and economic growth."

Wynne defeats Pupatello in 3rd ballot

Wynne defeated Sandra Pupatello on a third ballot, at the Ontario Liberal Party convention in Toronto on Saturday.

Wynne picked up the support of Eric Hoskins after the first round. She remained in second place after the second round of voting, but won a surprise endorsement from Charles Sousa, who many had expected would go to Pupatello. Gerard Kennedy then threw his support behind Wynne.

Liberal MPP Charles Sousa looks on as Wynne addresses media in her first news conference as premier-designate. (John Rieti/CBC)

"That was a critical moment when [Sousa] moved across the floor to us," Wynne told CBC News on Saturday after her win. Sousa and Kennedy were critical, she said, and would determine the winner.

Wynne said when she saw Sousa moving, but didn't know at first where he was going.

"When he started to move to us we thought, 'OK, this is fantastic momentum. We really are on our way,'" she said.

When Wynne was asked if she made any promises to Sousa in return for his support, she told CBC News that's not how she is going to build a cabinet.

"I'm going to have conversations with our colleagues going forward and we're going to put together a great team," Wynne said.

Wynne said she was surprised Kennedy came over as early as he did.

"I'm very happy that he found his way over to us," Wynne said.

Wynne secured the win on the third ballot by capturing 1,150 votes to Pupatello's 866.

21.16 | 0 komentar | Read More

Can Kathleen Wynne bring change to Ontario?

About The Author

Robert Fisher is a CBC News anchor and regular political commentator on CBC Radio. An award-winning journalist with more than 30 years of experience in public and private radio, Robert was a senior news anchor and political affairs specialist for the Global Television Network. Prior to that, he worked for 10 years with CBC Television, reporting on national, political and municipal politics.

Kathleen Wynne made history in Toronto becoming Ontario's first female premier and the country's first openly gay premier.

Now her task is to ensure she does not become history.

Her start during an appearance yesterday at her first news conference as the premier-designate set a new tone! Will it continue?

Some of that is up to PC leader Tim Hudak and NDP leader Andrea Horwath. But her party has a role to play in that, too.

Coming together after this convention should not prove to be a problem for the Ontario Liberals.

Leadership rival Charles Sousa's decision to throw his support to Wynne and not Sandra Pupatello at the convention was an important signal that things in the party and, more importantly, Ontario politics had to change.

When Wynne spoke to the media on Sunday, she called for an end to "the rancor and viciousness" she has seen in the legislature and she expressed a desire for debate to take place in a less poisonous atmosphere.

In my years of watching Ontario politics I cannot remember a time when things were so bitter and so divided.

Wynne now has a chance to change that and what she said during the Liberal leadership race, at the convention itself and at her first news conference tend to support the view that she wants and may well get it.

All of that said, Wynne is beginning the "delicate dance" as leader, in not running away from the Dalton McGuinty-led government past of which she was a major player and, setting her own course as premier.

And as she promised she is "hitting the ground running."

Kathleen Wynne (left) and Sandra Pupatello (right) entered a weekend convention as the two front-runners in the race to succeed departing Premier Dalton McGuinty. But it was Wynne who pulled ahead on the third ballot to become the premier-designate and claim the leadership job. (Nathan Denette/Canadian Press)

There have been talks with her leadership rivals, the leaders of the opposition, a call to the clerk of legislature to recall MPPs for February 19th, a decision to hold the party's scheduled caucus on Tuesday and the creation of a transition team headed by her talented friend, former MPP and cabinet minister Monique Smith.

And with the quick recall, time is compressed to get to job one: the selection of a new cabinet.

Wynne's leadership rivals — with the exception of Pupatello and Kennedy, who have not committed to running in the next election — will be a part of the new team.

There's already talk that:

• Sousa, backed up by his solid business-Bay Street CV, will be Wynne's new finance minister.
• Eric Hoskins will be promoted, perhaps to education minister with a mandate to deal with the ongoing teachers dispute.
• Glen Murray will land in a place to spotlight his ideas for among other things, the transforming the province's troubled manufacturing sector.
• Harinder Takhar, even with his support of Pupatello, will also be a part of the Wynne administration. Takhar represents an important and growing political demographic that the Liberals need now and into the next provincial election.

There will also be many new faces in the new cabinet including, likely, the party's president, Ottawa Centre MPP and new dad, Yasir Naqvi, as Wynne surely anticipates a long list of veteran resignations.

Then, there's a throne speech and, a budget, the deficit, the teacher issue and, a glimpse inside those heavy briefing books that may yet provide Wynne with some surprises.

So will all that and more change Wynne?

Some things will be different. She is, or will soon be, the premier, not just a minister — though she's promised to be her own agriculture minister for a year and she is no longer just an MPP.

This 59-year-old grandmother, who proved at the convention she can boogie with the best of them, is the person at the top — the person where the buck starts and stops at Queen's Park. She is the person who will determine the fate of her government and party.

In talking privately with Liberals, who will serve with her and who have in the past, the consensus is clear: "What you see is what you get."

One former cabinet minister told me he was always careful about what he said to Wynne. Asked why? He responded because unlike McGuinty, "she always listened."

Ontarians are now in search of the same thing.

21.16 | 0 komentar | Read More

Canadians want change on aboriginal policy, poll suggests

An exclusive Nanos Research poll conducted for CBC News indicates more than half of Canadians feel there's an urgent need to change federal government policy toward aboriginal Canadians.

More than half of those who responded to the poll describe the need for change in federal policy toward First Nations, Inuit and Métis people as urgent or somewhat urgent: 22.4 per cent see this as an urgent matter, and 34 per cent say it's somewhat urgent, for a total of 56.4 per cent.

Another 28.6 per cent described it less important, with 14.2 per cent saying it's somewhat not urgent and 14.4 per cent saying it's not urgent. Fifteen per cent said they were unsure.

The Nanos poll provided a series of options and asked respondents to say whether they felt each option would advance or not advance the cause of First Nations, Inuit and Métis people in Canada.

The majority of respondents — 62.3 per cent — said blockades of railways or roads would not advance the cause, with 14.8 per cent saying they would. Another 22.9 per cent said they weren't sure.

Almost half of respondents said a meeting of aboriginal leaders with the prime minister would advance their cause, coming in at 47.4 per cent. Another 22.9 per cent said a meeting wouldn't help, while 29.7 per cent said they were unsure.

Fewer people said they thought a meeting with the Governor General would advance the cause.

Response to a meeting with the Governor General was split: 39 per cent of respondents said they thought it would help, 31.1 per cent said it would not advance the cause of aboriginal Canadians and 29.9 per cent said they weren't sure.

A meeting with Gov. Gen. David Johnston was one of the demands Attawapiskat Chief Theresa Spence made during her protest. First Nations people have a traditional relationship with the Crown going back to when the first treaties were signed.

A summit on the future of First Nations, Inuit and Métis people in Canada was more popular. Almost half — 48.8 per cent — of those who answered the poll said a summit would advance the cause of aboriginal people, with 19.9 per cent saying it would not, and 31.3 per cent saying they were unsure.

Need clear requirements to succeed

The poll also showed confusion among Canadians over who represents which concerns.

Just under half — 45 per cent — of respondents said a meeting between Assembly of First Nations National Chief Shawn Atleo and Prime Minister Stephen Harper would help advance the cause of "First Nations, Inuit and Métis people." The AFN represents First Nations people from 630 communities in Canada. Inuit and Métis have their own organizations.

Another 31.1 per cent said they were unsure whether a meeting with Atleo and Harper would advance the cause of aboriginal people, while 23.9 per cent said it would not.

Nik Nanos, head of Nanos Research, says the more sensational options were the ones Canadians were least likely to support.

"The one thing that the Canadians would like to see and did think could advance the cause of First Nations and aboriginal peoples related to having a summit discussion and also having a meeting — meetings between the prime minister and key First Nations leaders," Nanos said.

Nanos says it's important to have clear goals in order to get progress on issues.

"I think for this to move forward, First Nations and aboriginal Canadians have to articulate clear requirements or a clear ask in order to continue the dialogue," he said.

"Leaders have to define specifically what they want in order to promote a public debate on the future of the relationship between First Nations people and Canada."

The poll indicates there isn't overwhelming sympathy for the cause, although there was high awareness.

Nearly half of respondents said aboriginal people have been treated fairly or somewhat fairly by the federal government, with 23.4 per cent choosing fairly and 24.7 per cent choosing somewhat fairly, for a total of 48.1 per cent.

The number of respondents who felt aboriginal people have been treated somewhat unfairly or unfairly came in at 38.9 per cent, with 21.6 saying somewhat unfairly and 17.3 per cent choosing unfairly. Thirteen per cent of respondents said they were unsure.

"The narrative that some are advancing related to injustices of the past [doesn't] necessarily resonate with all Canadians," Nanos said.

The majority of people who answered the poll — 64.2 per cent — said they had heard of the so-called grassroots movement Idle No more.

The poll surveyed 1,000 Canadians aged 18 and over on Jan. 18 and 19, 2013. There is no margin of error calculated for an online poll.

21.16 | 0 komentar | Read More

House returns as Idle No More protesters gather

MPs are set to return to the House of Commons today as Idle No More protesters plan to march to Parliament Hill for a world day of action.

The protesters are opposed to environmental law changes adopted after the House of Commons and Senate passed Bill C-45, the second omnibus budget implementation bill.

The protesters plan to meet on Victoria Island, where Attawapiskat Chief Theresa Spence and Manitoba elder Raymond Robinson spent six weeks limiting their food intake to fish broth, herbal tea and water, and then march the kilometre or so to Parliament Hill for a noon ET rally.

Just days after Spence and Robinson ended their protests, New Democrat MP Romeo Saganash will hold a press conference to discuss a private member's bill he's bringing on the rights of aboriginal people.

A spokesman for the NDP said the bill "is about making sure the laws of Canada are consistent with the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous people."

Saganash helped negotiate the UN declaration. Last Thursday, he called for Canada to move beyond its belated endorsement of the declaration.

"The norms that are there are minimum standards that all countries should respect that endorsed the UN declaration," Saganash said. "Canada finally came on board not too long ago. Thank you very much, but let's move forward from that."

Economy still Conservatives' focus

Government House Leader Peter Van Loan says the government plans to continue focusing on Canada's economy over the next few months.

The first piece of legislation on the order paper will be a technical tax bill, to update legislation based on changes made more than 10 years ago, he said. The next bill to be dealt with is the Fair Rail Freight Service Act, dealing with railway contracts.

As for complaints by Idle No More that the last budget implementation bill infringes on indigenous sovereignty, Van Loan says it's got Royal Assent and become law, and it won't be revisited.

The meeting between aboriginal leaders, including Assembly of First Nations National Chief Shawn Atleo and Prime Minister Stephen Harper, was constructive, Van Loan said.

"I think that process that [Harper] got underway will continue, particularly the key commitments for a high-level process on the treaty relationship and a high-level process on comprehensive claims resolution," Van Loan said.

"That does not necessarily require legislation. The dialogue will continue, and occasionally we need legislation to move ahead particular settlements."

The government committed to have the prime minister's office and the privy council, the administrative arm of the PMO, oversee how aboriginal files are handled.

New Democrats seek civility

Van Loan also pointed to the First Nations accountability bill that made it through the House last fall and is now in front of the Senate.

"I think that in the current environment, there's obviously great interest among Canadians in seeing that complete its process," Van Loan said.

New Democrat House Leader Nathan Cullen says the Official Opposition wants to take another crack at instilling more decorum and civility in the House of Commons. Cullen says he's been consulting with some former parliamentarians from both the government and opposition sides of the aisle and in other legislatures.

"We've gone pretty broad on this to find out what works," Cullen said. "We don't think there's a need to reinvent the wheel, but we want to be more bold. I don't think this is a subtle shift that we need, I think that we need things that are more impactful on the working lives of MPs so that they know that we're working on this."

The New Democrats also have plans, he says, "around resolving some of the longstanding First Nations issues and bringing this government around to creating a path forward for Canadians.

"There's been a lot of protest, and now is the time for solutions," Cullen said.

The government is now more than four months late on its commitment to strengthen the powers of Elections Canada, following a unanimous vote in the House last March.

Cullen says he thinks the delay is due to more Conservative MPs facing alleged election scandals.

"It seems they have hit the pause button," Cullen said. "The government makes these commitments to [do things], shortly and soon, and I don't know how they define those terms.

"I don't know if their plan is to rag the puck until the next election so they can cheat and steal another few seats again, but I think Canadians will be watching."

21.16 | 0 komentar | Read More

Canada's royal baby bill risks constitutional complications

The federal government is hoping for speedy and painless delivery of its bill to change the gender rules for royal succession, but there are some complicating constitutional factors that could slow things down.

The legislation, expected to come in the first few weeks after MPs return from their winter break, is a rare and unprecedented example of a Canadian bill crafted in co-ordination with 15 other countries, which all need to do the same thing: take the first wee steps towards modernizing the monarchy.

But a nagging question lurks: Does changing the rules governing the monarchy amount to changing the Canadian Constitution in a fundamental way?

Some believe it does, which makes Prime Minister Stephen Harper's hope for quick passage more of a high-risk procedure in that it might set a precedent in by-passing the provinces on an amendment that some feel requires provincial consent.

Rushing through a change to the office of Queen without due process might also be seen as diminishing the status of the Crown at a time when some of Canada's First Nations are attempting to renew their special relationship with that institution.

The crux of the bill will implement three previously agreed-to rule changes, to end centuries-old practices now viewed as discriminatory:

• male children inheriting the throne ahead of their older, female siblings.
• a ban on a monarch or direct heir to the throne marrying a Roman Catholic.
• the requirement for all descendants of George II to obtain the monarch's permission to marry or else have their marriage declared void.

The third change is thought to affect several hundred people. It will be replaced with a new requirement for the monarch's consent for only the first six people in line to the throne.

Canada's bill will fall in line with legislation now moving through the British Parliament.

U.K. bill went first

British Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg, the Liberal Democrat leader who is Prime Minister David Cameron's coalition partner and the spokesman for the U.K. bill, said during House of Commons debate at Westminster last Tuesday that the current rules have "no place in modern Britain" and "reinforce old prejudices and old fears."

Updating the way the Royal Family self-perpetuates became more of a priority after the 2011 marriage between Prince William and Catherine, Duchess of Cambridge, followed by last fall's pregnancy announcement.

The July due date for a possibly female heir to the throne has focused the minds of governments across the 16 Commonwealth countries where Queen Elizabeth reigns.

Prime Minister Harper was among those who unanimously supported the British initiative to pass common legislation to amend the ancient laws — now hundreds of years old — that set out the rules for royal succession.

Cameron's coalition government went first, fast-tracking legislation introduced on Dec.13. The move was not without risks for a Conservative prime minister in a minority government, who needs to avoid offending his traditional, monarchist base while accomodating the more reformist push of his coalition partners, the Liberal Democrats.

British newspapers have reported that Buckingham Palace is "on board" with the changes, with Clegg saying "extensive discussions were held" about the "very precise" reforms.

The Canadian bill will not mirror exactly the British legislation, but must amend in the same manner the same ancient acts that form the basis of Canada's system of constitutional monarchy.

Canada's legislation was still being drafted earlier this month.

Canada has independent Crown

At the time of Confederation, the British North America Act that joined Canada's first four provinces described them as "federally united into One Dominion under the Crown of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, with a Constitution similar in Principle to that of the United Kingdom."

But Commonwealth countries such as Canada officially got their own heads of state when the British Crown became divisible with the passage of the Statute of Westminster in 1931.

Since they all observed the same rules for the line of succession in the years since, all 16 countries continue to have the same person, Queen Elizabeth, as their monarch.

At the Commonwealth Heads of Government meeting in Perth, Australia, in October 2011, all agreed to act in tandem to modernize the rules.

New Zealand is coordinating the effort so that legislation passed in the separate legislatures all comes into effect simultaneously.

It's not a simple task: while all governments provided their written agreement by Dec. 2 to all three changes, the distinct processes for each to make the changes official have their own possibly tricky elements.

"The steps needed in each realm to implement the agreed changes, including any legislation, depend on the constitutional situation in each realm," explains Rebecca Kitteridge, the secretary of the cabinet and clerk of the executive council in New Zealand, who is working with the U.K. and other countries to coordinate things.

"Those realms that intend to legislate will need to follow their own legislative timetables," she wrote to CBC News. "It is intended that all of the legislation, including the U.K. legislation, will be brought into force at the same time."

Kitteridge confirmed the changes will apply to any baby born after the Oct. 2011 Perth Agreement.

Provinces not weighing in (yet?)

British Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg (l) and Prime Minister, David Cameron (r) laugh during a joint news conference earlier this month. Clegg is the spokesman for the Cameron government's bill to change the royal line of succession. (Peter Nicholls/Pool/Reuters)

For its part, the Harper government does not appear to have consulted with all, or perhaps any, of its provincial counterparts before providing its assurances the rule changes would pass.

"We have not been contacted to date and Ontario has not considered the question of the appropriate process to change succession laws in Canada," Neala Barton, a spokesperson for the Ontario premier's office wrote to CBC News last week.

"That said, we are not aware of any reason why we would oppose changes to succession laws that are necessary to keep Canada in line with changes adopted by the British Parliament."

Any province that wanted to raise a fuss about the need for provincial consultation has a legal precedent to argue: a 2003 ruling from the Ontario Superior Court of Justice found that the 1701 Act of Settlement — one of the ancient laws the bill would amend — is "part of the laws of Canada" and the rules of succession are "by neccessity incorporated into the Constitution of Canada."

And here's the sticking point: section 41 (a) of Canada's Constitution, patriated in 1982, says that an amendment in relation to the office of "the Queen, the Governor General and the Lieutenant Governor of a province" can be made only where authorized by "resolutions of the Senate and House of Commons and of the legislative assembly of each province."

So does that mean reforming the rules about who can be king or queen requires unanimous consent from Canada's provincial capitals?

Saskatchewan's view, shared with CBC News last month, is that this bill doesn't amount to changing the Constitution, in that the Constitution simply defines our monarch as the monarch of England, whoever that is.

Another Atlantic province shares the legal view that provincial consultation is not necessary, because these changes simply maintain the symmetry of succession that currently exists with the United Kingdom and the other realms.

The Parti Québécois government in Quebec — not always a bastion of monarchist support — has yet to join the conversation.

But what about Canada's sovereign Crown? If this spring's process doesn't treat this amendment as a Constitutional reform, does that diminish what the authors of the 1982 Constitution intended?

"I'm not sure the provinces have thought through what kind of precedent it sets," says University of Ottawa professor Philippe Lagassé.

He suggest that if the provinces overlook their constitutional right to weigh in on this matter then that could give the federal government a "free hand to do other things [without the provinces' consent] in the future, citing this as a precedent."

With First Nations raising the historic and legal importance of the Crown in establishing their treaty rights over the course of the recent Idle No More movement, it would be odd for MPs to be seen as diminishing the significance of changes to the Crown's line of succession by not fully consulting on and debating the bill, he suggests.

Lagassé says it would be "inherently dangerous" for Canada to be seen as simply going along with the British legislation.

However, "my sense is that none of the parties see this as a fight worth having," Lagassé says, noting that Opposition Leader Tom Mulcair, despite his Quebec origins, doesn't seem keen to engage.

The constitutional limits of what the federal government has the right to change on its own need to be tested, Lagassé suggests, which could prompt someone to bring a court challenge.

21.16 | 0 komentar | Read More