Paul S. Graham

Michael Byers, one of Canada’s outspoken critics of the war in Afghanistan, will be speaking in Winnipeg next Thursday.

Date: Thursday, October 4, 2007
Place: Club Room, Hotel Fort Garry
Time: 7 PM
Admission: A suggested donation of $5 to defray expenses has been requested by the sponsors.
Sponsor: Peace Alliance Winnipeg

Dr. Byers’ work focuses on the interaction of international law and international politics, especially with regard to international organizations, the use of military force, the law of the sea, human rights and Canada-United States relations.

He is a regular contributor to the London Review of Books, Toronto Star and Globe and Mail, and is the author, most recently, of Intent for a Nation: What is Canada for? (Vancouver/Toronto: Douglas & McIntyre, June 2007).

He holds a Canada Research Chair in Global Politics and International Law at the University of British Columbia, where he also serves as a faculty member at the Liu Institute for Global Issues. Prior to July 2004, he was a tenured Professor of Law and Director of Canadian Studies at Duke University. From 1996-1999, he was a Fellow of Jesus College, Oxford University.

Here is an excerpt from a recent article Byers wrote for the Globe and Mail:

“… Travelling through Europe this month, I’ve been struck by how national debates in different NATO countries take place in isolation from each other. Many Germans, for instance, assume Canadians support the counterinsurgency mission in southern Afghanistan. Similarly, many Canadians assume the 3,000 German soldiers in relatively safe northern Afghanistan aren’t going anywhere soon.

“In fact, 54 per cent of Germans think their soldiers should be withdrawn. In the Netherlands, 58 per cent want the 2,000 Dutch troops brought home by next year. Even in Poland, where the government strongly backs the mission and none of its 1,100 soldiers have been killed, a staggering 78 per cent oppose the Polish presence in Afghanistan.

“Governments have fallen because of their support for the mission. In Italy, Prime Minister Romano Prodi resigned in February after losing a Senate vote over a foreign policy that included keeping 1,800 troops in Afghanistan. Although he was asked to form a new government, Italy’s commitment to the mission remains tenuous at best.

“Other governments are teetering on the edge . . .”

Including ours. Bloc Quebecois Leader Gilles Duceppe has repeatedly threatened to topple the government unless there is a clear mandate to withdraw troops from Afghanistan by February 2009.

In my view, 2009 is not soon enough. But toppling this government is an appealing prospect. Maybe it will help speed up the process of getting Canada out of one of America’s dirty wars.

Peter Holle, of the Frontier Institute for Public Policy (FIPC), writes in the September 23 issue of the Winnipeg Free Press (Parable of the drug dealer):

“The idea that our carbon emissions are destroying the planet, however, is beneficial to anyone involved in this particular science. As long as we think we face a choice between our industrialized way of life and saving the planet, global warming is a big research topic, a big lobbying issue, a big political opportunity and a big media story.”

He goes on to suggest that various groups expressing concerns about global warming are motivated by financial interests (Greenpeace, the news media, etc.) and anti-capitalist political interests (coyly described as “the older class-struggle and state ownership types“).

He even attaches a dollar value to this conflict of interest:

“If conservative estimates of the dollar amounts of U.S. government research grants are correct, climate change is a $2 billion a year industry.”

Even if Holle’s unsourced “conservative estimate” of $2 billion is accurate, it is chump change compared to the reported profits of the major oil companies in 2006:

1. Exxon Mobil ($39.5 billion),
2. Royal Dutch Shell ($25.4 billion)
3. BP ($22.0 billion)
4. Chevron ($17.1 billion)
5. ConocoPhillips ($15.55 billion)

Holle continues

“If, as many contend, we are experiencing natural warming with minimal impact, more research is unnecessary.”

Who are these “many” who are contending that we are experiencing “natural warming”????

Perhaps one of Holle’s “many” is FIPC research advisor Tim Ball. Ball, who taught at the University of Winnipeg until 1996, has made a name for himself as a climate change denier. According to DeSmog Blog:

“Ball is listed as a “consultant” of a Calgary-based global warming skeptic organization called the “Friends of Science” (FOS). In a January 28, 2007 article in the Toronto Star, the President of the FOS admitted that about one-third of the funding for the FOS is provided by the oil industry. In an August, ’06 Globe and Mail feature, the FOS was exposed as being funded in part by the oil and gas sector and hiding the fact that they were. According to the Globe and Mail, the oil industry money was funnelled through the Calgary Foundation charity, to the University of Calgary and then put into an education trust for the FOS.”

According to Holle:

“There is no global warming conspiracy. But there is a group of people, let us call them translators, who inform us about scientific issues we cannot understand first-hand. These translators have their own incentives, which mostly tend toward keeping the man-made global warming hypothesis alive. When the warming lobby warns of perverse incentives distorting the debate, they just might be right.”

The same might be said for Holle and his organization. FIPC is a neo-liberal think tank whose raison d’etre seems to be promotion of untrammeled economic growth, deregulation, smaller governments, and so on. FIPC preaches the mantra of freedom through wealth creation and property rights.

Holle’s personal history includes a stint as senior policy advisor in the Saskatchewan government of Grant Devine during the 1980s, according to SourceWatch. Devine’s rule was marked by large scale privatization, reductions in public services and corruption. Devine left the people of Saskatchewan with a $15 billion debt. One might wonder what role Holle played in the sell-off of Crown corporations and natural resources that destroyed Saskatchewan’s public institutions and history of balanced budgets.

I agree with Holle on one thing. There is no “global warming conspiracy.” But the “climate change deniers conspiracy” — that is another question.

For a lighter look at climate change denial . . .

Canadians should feel shame and outrage at the decision of the Harper government to vote against the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.

Reading the document, it is not difficult to understand why the Tories are unwilling to join the rest of the world in recognizing the rights of aboriginal peoples. Virtually every aspect of the declaration speaks eloquently and forcefully against abuses of the kind perpetrated by Canadian governments for generations.

Don’t take my word for it. Read the declaration and judge for yourself.

Who can possibly be opposed to security and prosperity, much less partnership?

The Council of Canadians, Canadian Labour Congress, the Canadian Union of Public Employees, the Communications, Energy & Paperworkers Union of Canada, the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives, the Canadian Union of Postal Workers, Common Frontiers-Canada and the Quebec Network on Continental Integration — that’s who!

On August 20-21, Stephen Harper, George Bush and Felipe Calderón are meeting in Montebello, Quebec, to discuss continent-wide harmonization of regulations affecting energy, military, environment, foreign, immigration, health care, and etc — also known as the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America. Only in our wildest dreams could we expect this trio to work on an agreement that will offer improvements in these areas.

The Council of Canadians is promoting a National Day of Action against the SPP.

In Winnipeg, the STOP SPP! Citizens Concerned About Deep Integration is holding a demonstration at the Federal Building in Winnipeg (corner of Main Street and Water Avenue) on Monday, August 20, 2007, from 4:00 to 6:00 PM. The event will include speakers, live music, entertainment, information, a letter writing campaign, and a petition.

Confirmed speakers include Robert Chernomas (of the Department of Economics at the University of Manitoba), Darlene Dziewit (president of the Manitoba Federation of Labour) and Kevin Rebeck (president of CUPE Manitoba).

Security, prosperity and partnership are all feel-good words — comfort food for the soul, in much the same way that Kraft Dinner is nutritionally empty solace for the tummy.

Let’s get out on August 20 and tell Harper and Co. we won’t swallow it!

Posted to the IUF website 06-Jul-2007

The one-month occupation of the restaurant and parking lot of the Buffalo Grill in Viry-Chatillon outside Paris (see below) has resulted in an important victory for 20 undocumented migrant workers – employed, fired, or forced to resign – at the fast food chain. With the support of the Commerce, Distribution and Services Federation of the CGT (FCDS-CGT), and international support from the IUF, local authorities have yielded to the groundswell of support for the workers and agreed to regularize their employment status. The July 5 decision followed three rounds of negotiations with local authorities initiated after the workers’ expulsion from the parking lot on July 3.

The FCDS-CGT, declaring that “a battle has been won but the struggle continues”, has thanked the IUF and all who supported this important mobilization.

Photo: Les espérances planétariennes

Thanks to Eric Lee, at LabourStart, for notice of this issue. A longer version of the following is posted at the web site of the International Union of Food, Agricultural, Hotel, Restaurant, Catering, Tobacco and Allied Workers’ Associations (IUF), an international federation of trade unions representing 12 million workers in 120 countries.

Poorly paid and routinely pressured to perform un- or inadequately-compensated overtime, irregular migrants employed at the French-based fast food chain Buffalo Grill are fighting back after being denounced to the authorities and fired or pressured to quit their jobs. The migrants, mostly of African origin, many with years of employment at the chain, face expulsion from the France of Nicolas Sarkozy to their country of origin.

Last year, a popular immigrant Buffalo Grill worker announced his candidacy for workplace representation elections. in February 2007, his irregular employment status was “anonymously” denounced to the police, who proceeded to control the employment papers of the chain’s more than 600 foreign workers. Four were fired and others pressured to resign. A group of undocumented workers, supported by the Commerce, Distribution and Services Federation of the CGT (FCDS-CGT), is fighting back by occupying the Buffalo Grill in Viry-Chatillon, in the South of Paris. The police have not yet moved to enforce a court order to evacuate the premises and the occupation continues.

Buffalo Grill, based in France, operates close to 300 restaurants in France, Spain, Belgium, Luxembourg and Switzerland, employing over 6,000 workers. Two top executives of the chain were investigated on manslaughter charges in 2003 following revelations that the company had violated the French ban on importing British beef during the mad cow disease embargo of 1996-2000.

Since 2005, Buffalo Griill has been owned by the US property investment fund Colony Capital, owners of the Fairmont/Raffles and Kerzner hotel and resort chains. Colony Capital has also taken a significant stake in the Accor hotel and services group.

The FCDS-CGT is demanding the reinstatement of all Buffalo Grill workers fired or forced to resign, along with regularization of their employment status and an end to all legal and police measures. You can support their struggle by sending a message (in English and French) in support of these demands to Buffalo Grill and Colony Capital management.

Click here to send a message of support. Copies of your message will automatically be sent to the union and to the secretariat.

I just received this message from Eric Lee at LabourStart. Please read and act.

—————-

In unions in different countries, we call each other by different names. Some unions use the word ‘comrade’, others use ‘colleague’. And many use the terms ‘brother’ and ‘sister’ to describe fellow union members.

Are we simply using these words because we always have, or do they still have any real meaning?

I ask that question because in the last few days one of our brothers has been brutally tortured and murdered, and another one, an innocent man, jailed.

Santiago Rafael Cruz

In Mexico, Santiago Rafael Cruz, a 29-year-old union organizer from the Farm Labor Organizing Committee (FLOC, AFL-CIO) was brutally tortured and murdered. Santiago was a successful organizer in the USA who had moved down to Mexico to run the union’s office there. His activities aroused the hostility of those who fear the growth of trade unionism among farm workers, and generated attacks in the media, threats of deportation, robberies and intimidation, culminating in this terrible crime.

Santiago has a family in Mexico, a mother, father, sisters and brothers. But his family is much larger than that; it includes all of us. We must grieve together with his family, and we must fight together with them as one large family to ensure that the Mexican government investigates the murder, arrests and prosecutes those responsible, and ensures the safety of union activists in that country.

Please take a moment to send off your message today.

Mahmoud Salehi

About the same time that union-hating murderers were ending the life of this courageous young man in Mexico, on the other side of the world Iranian security forces lured union activist Mahmoud Salehi into the local prosecutor’s office on the pretext of discussing plans for this year’s May Day celebrations. Salehi, a former president of the bakery workers’ union in the city of Saqez, was then arrested and put in jail for a year with a three year suspended sentence on top of that. His crime was that in 2004 he organized a May Day demonstration.

Tell the Iranian authorities to release Mahmoud Salehi now, and to drop all charges.

I doubt very much if Santiago and Mahmoud ever met — and yet they are brothers. One now languishing in an Iranian prison, the other in a Mexican grave.

If these two men were not just fellow trade union members but actually your brothers, the sons of your mothers and fathers, how would you react? I know that you wouldn’t be silent — you would be up in arms and the whole world would know your anger and your pain.

Please pass this message on. Let’s tell the Mexican and Iranian governments that we in the international trade union movement are a single family, and we will not tolerate our brothers and sisters being tortured, jailed or murdered anywhere in the world.

– Eric Lee

For citizens with a desire for progressive political change, the anticipated Manitoba provincial election is guaranteed to disappoint.

We are still recovering from the damage done by the Tories the last time they held power and progressives rightly will not trust them with our vote.

The Liberals long ago ceased to have political importance; indeed their only contribution in the last 30 years of provincial politics has been to offer, rarely and long ago, a spirited opposition à la Sharon Carstairs or Lloyd Axworthy (when he was much younger.)

The Greens? They are worth a second look. And perhaps your vote. They have some good ideas, but the party is very small and unlikely to do more than annoy the NDP in one or two urban ridings.

In Manitoba, the NDP has come to occupy the territory provincially that the Liberal Party holds nation-wide: that of the Natural Governing Party. As an “NGP” the NDP is not hideous enough to kick out, but neither does it inspire any confidence that it has the ideas or even the desire to implement a progressive platform. As a result it enjoys broad support, drawing votes from folks who would feel comfortable voting Liberal on one hand, and those who dread a return of the Tories. The only thing that could cost the NDP a victory in the next provincial election would be if it were caught with its fingers deep in the public till, as were the federal Liberals under Chretien and Martin.

Where does that leave us lefty, pinko, commie, tree-hugging, red-green hippie feminist anarchists — otherwise known as thoughtful critics of late capitalism (or neo-barbarism, if you prefer)?

A friend once quipped: “Don’t vote – you’ll only encourage them!” That may be an option for some.

For the rest of us, perhaps the best we can do will be to inject some meaningful content into the election that is to come after Gary Doer has examined the entrails of a dying chicken to find the most propitious moment to drop the writ.

The Manitoba office of the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives has decided to do just that with a new blog. It’s definitely worth a visit and a bookmark. Moreover, I hope readers will contribute to the CCPA Manitoba Election Blog, and work actively to inject progressive ideas into the coming election.

If we don’t do it, who will?

Stephen Harper has taken great pains to position his party as an honest, decent, straight talking alternative to the corrupt, decadent, multi-faced Liberals they replaced.

The Conservatives have Liberal corruption to thank for their election, and have made accountability a priority. Or at least they have made talking about accountability a priority. This gem comes from the PM’s web site:

“No aspect of responsible government is more fundamental than having the trust of citizens. Canadians’ faith in the institutions and practices of government has been eroded. This new government trusts in the Canadian people, and its goal is that Canadians will once again trust in their government. It is time for accountability.”

In December, with great fanfare, the government passed the Federal Accountability Act. Earlier that year, the government announced an accountability action plan, declaring that it was “turning a new leaf.”

And just to make sure we get the message, almost every official announcement contains the phrase “Canada’s New Government” — “Canada’s New Government announces this . . . or that . . . or the other thing . . .”

His plan seems to be working. The profound disgust engendered by widespread Liberal misconduct has led friends who ought to know better to conclude that while they may not agree with Harper on many things, “at least he’s honest.”

Is Stephen Harper honest? Or is Canada’s New Government up to the same old tricks of his predecessors, Liberal and Tory alike? This, just in from the Canadian Press:

Harper underpays for government jet

OTTAWA — Documents show Prime Minister Stephen Harper and his Conservatives are paying a fraction of the cost of using the government’s Challenger jets for partisan and personal use.

Invoices obtained by The Canadian Press show the Tories are paying equivalent of commercial airfares, far less than the $9,000-an-hour cost of the Challenger.

One of those flights was for Harper and his entourage to attend a Maple Leafs game in Toronto.

As government corruption goes, this is small potatoes. But it is a sign that Canada’s New Government is anything but.

A while back I posted a piece called Framing the Left, which focused on the theories of  George Lakoff of the Rockridge Institute concerning the effective communication of progressive values and ideas.

Murray Dobbin’s Feb. 6, 2007 article in The Tyee, How the Left Should Frame Issues, makes a good start at applying Lakoff’s ideas to Canadian federal politics. Well worth reading . . .