I’ve had several discussions with people recently on the topic of equalization in the Canadian federation. Here is an excellent resource on equalization. The historical information is interesting, but the three sections on how it works, current issues and myths are excellent.

 › political     2006-05-30 17:50   ...0 comments

Aficionados of my political views know that whenever a problem rears its ugly head, I look to the media.

Want to know why global warming is not on the agenda? Ask the media. Want to know why we have gay marriage? Ask the media. Want to know why Canadians believe health care has been in urgent crisis only in the 3 months before each election? Ask the media.

The media sets the agenda, tells us what’s cool. It tells us who is the voice of reason and who is a “special interest group”. The media is extremely important.

In order to have an effective Canadian society we need to have a diverse media, one that questions all the issues, raises all the points of view, and that has reasonable diversity in editorial control and opinion. If you don’t have this, then the media becomes big brother and skews the agenda. In the extreme you have the american media where liberal has ceased to be a position and has become an epithet. If the media does not question everything (either because it can’t or won’t) then we lose the basis of our democracy.

The media in this country has already been eviscerated by years of mergers and acquisitions. There are fewer editorial boards than ever, and many are under the thumb of right wing editors. Despite the fact that the news media are hugely right wing, Conservative supporters continue to whine that the Toronto Star and the CBC are unfair to them, and in fact that the media in general has it out for them¹.

All of this is secondary to what Harper’s new view of the media is. Harper believes the media should basically reprint what he says verbatim, and should not ask tough questions. He now has descended to the point where he believes questions should be asked only by his crony reporters who will not embarass him. He apparently does not realize that politics is about communicating your message and ideas to the people. Where is the sense of openness and accountability he promised us in the last election?

Yesterday, two dozen or so parliamentary reporters walked out of his press conference. They did so after refusing to sign a list from which “authorized reporters” would be selected by Harper handlers for question-asking rights. Harper announced that since no-one was on the list, no-one would ask questions. The best coverage of this event is here².

The Toronto Star, long a Harper-bashing paper³, did not walk out. Here are the comments from their bureau chief (reprinted on a Toronto Star blog). It explains the role and benefits (to journalists and politicians) of the Parliamentary Press Gallery. The comments are interesting too.

This is all going to be very damaging to Harper. It will be interesting to see how this plays out. His attempts to muzzle the media are highly offensive to me (see also the exclusion of reporters from covering military coffins, an aping of the U.S common practise… beacon of light that it is in this regard.) Really, though, it is a problem that will take care of itself. Much is being made right now that Harper could cruise to a majority. Of course he can, who would be running against him? It will be much more interesting to see what happens in the fall.

ETA: There is good material, with lots of interesting links, in this blog entry.

¹If you believe this, you should check the facts (look at the cumulative report) that shows Martin vs. Harper).

²Note that this Calgary-based source was Harper-biased during the election as per note 1.

³According to note 1, the Star really was egregious for this.

 › normative     2006-05-25 15:42   ...1 comment

The Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI) is the publisher of the widely read Nutrition Action Healthletter.

I recently came across the saturated vs. trans fat debate in an online article, and it is interesting that the position of the CSPI on trans fats has run the gamut over the last twenty years or so.

An article by a detractor aims to pin the CSPI for flip-flopping and trying to cover its role in promoting trans fats through Nutrition Action. The article has many problems, and you really have to work to sift the interesting historical information regarding CSPI from the random flaming the author indulges in.

Likely the truth is in the middle; we all know that eating too many saturated fats is not good… and that movie popcorn is bad for you. However, the essay does quote Nutrition Action’s comments over the years, and if you look at them (distinct from the rest of the rant) they don’t make a pretty package.

I come down on the side of trying to consume products that are made of food, and not chemical substitutes and fillers — or gobs of mouth-pleasing fat. If, however, you believe the author’s claim that the CSPI was the central figure in the creation of the trans fat industry then they have a lot to answer for and have not done much answering.

Read the essay and judge for yourself!

ETA: See also CSPI on Wikipedia. A bit slanted too, but to me the news is that there is a possible slant. Perhaps it’s just the name, but I did not know there was controversy over this organization at all.

 › food     2006-05-18 16:11   ...0 comments

Quite pleased with myself! I recerted my National Lifeguard Service qualification tonight at the annual “Old Fart” recert at Dovercourt. I was a bit apprehensive before going… my qualification has been expired for a long time (about 5 years I think) and I knew I would be rusty. I didn’t want to be embarassed by falling flat on my face, but things actually went quite smoothly. I’m a lifeguard again.

I met an interesting person tonight too, one that I thought would be a good fit for both Jen and I in terms of a new friend who also is into the outdoors and stuff. Perhaps I should have said would have been a good fit, but actually it was a bit of a missed opportunity because I didn’t really make the connection with the person despite chatting for a bit.

Thinking about the situation in hindsight I realized a couple of things. First, I spend a lot of time getting people to talk to me while I listen. That is nice, but I realized after the fact that the person likely did not know that we shared interests, because I didn’t provide any information that revealed my interests… I just listened. Second, I realized that I have no idea how to move from the “hey this is a nice conversation but we’ll never see each other again” stage to the “hey let’s get together sometime” stage. It must be possible to do, but the devil is in the details and I’m never sure how to go about it.

Coming up in a future entry… how to ensure you won’t be invited back on a winery tour…

 › sports     2006-05-17 01:10   ...1 comment

Well, we are a little behind up here in Ottawa, but spring has officially arrived. How can I tell? Well, early flowers are out. We have some daffodils in our yard, but what’s really got me going is that the tulips are opening by Dow’s lake.

I noted their loveliness while driving to work this morning, but didn’t have the camera with me. I got as far as the experimental farm when a striking magnolia in full bloom had me turning around to get the digital camera from home.

You may remember last year’s tulip portraits; I am planning, in fact, to repeat those this year, but consider this a sneak preview on the tulip front, with a side dish of magnolia.

All this within a kilometre of our house. One more reason to be happy to be living where we are.

ETA: I emailed the farm people to ask what variety of Magnolia this is. The grounds maintenance supervisor told me it is: Magnolia ‘Leonard Messel’ (Magnolia Kobus var. Loebnori ‘Leonard Messel’).

8 more photos

 › photos     2006-05-02 00:32   ...1 comment