The battle of the lists

Lists, used to be a place where jousts took place. Now the battle of the lists is who has the largest collection of names to use in the upcoming election between Brocanier and Partridge. On one side you have John Wright, who was handed to Broc by Peter Delanty (a well placed local liberal), the alleged Northumberland 'rainmaker' and on the other you have Martin Partridge who has been collecting lists for years so that he can fundraise for Liberals of all stripes.

The downside is that anybody who has been connected with the Liberals at any time in recent history will now be fair game for phone calls and other messages from both sides. So how will the general population be hit up by these candidates? Using google we find that Brocanier has a website here even has his own domain name 'gilbrocanier.ca' but no facebook page. Partridge has neither but has powerful allies who could create one in seconds - wait for it.

The BurdReport is told that online campaigning will be a way of reaching the electorate. It will be interesting to see just how "Obamamania" goes hyperlocal.

This just in - Mr. Brocanier will have an opponent in the election

Mr Martin Partridge has filed papers for the Mayor's position in this Fall's election. More to come but the MSM will be all over it tomorrow.

Apropos  to the comment above here is NToday's Ted Amsden's story about Martin and his platform. The BurdReport spoke to Mr Partridge and got the same spin. But the punch of his message is that the Town needs to be looked at in terms of 'value for taxes' and only fresh eyes can do that. After all Mr Brocanier has had four years to make an impact on the public perception that taxes are not high and he has appeared to fail as many taxpayers still do believe that their taxes are high.

Did you know........

....that Premier Dad was in Town today? The love of my life, out walking with her sister came upon a gaggle of bodyguards and an entourage at the 'Dutch Oven' this afternoon. Scanning the local MSM I find there is no mention of the event, [no forward work? ed] but NNews says it will have an exclusive interview up on the website, as of yet nothing.

There is a story about PremDad visiting the Quinte YMCA, but nothing about where else he was today. But if he hit the DO you can be sure it was after the dead white tories had left - they might have had a thing or two to say about his government. Interestingly enough Looo was with him amid a press release from John O'Toole the MPP from Durham that publicly castigated both McG and Loo for their activities with local health care. Ahah - the penny dropped, don't tell anybody you are coming and the liklihood of a demo about local health care is dead, cunning like a fox!

Sometimes Councils do dumb things

Port Hope Council often does things that puzzle the constituents. Buying a potentially liable piece of contaminated real estate for little return, carrying a 6 million dollar liability for the Police Service and now refusing to name a street after its most famous living persona - Farley Mowat.

As an interested observer the BurdReport is puzzled by a few things. One is a good reason why a street should not be named after him, the other is an explanation of the vote by the majority of Council and also the absence of a naming policy that would allow/disallow such a thing to happen.

I should suspect that Farley is embarrassed by all the hoo-hah surrouding this proposal, but if he was he should have told the public and the proponents that he wasn't interested, perhaps if he did the Council would then be offended by the snub. Still the episode was allowed to string out and now the answer is no. It's a good job that he and his wife choose to summer on the east Coast as he is missing this confusing saga.

Where's Rob Ford when you need him

Rob Ford is a bombastic populist who is obsessive about Council and public servants' salaries. he also lives and works in Toronto so why should we care about what he thinks? Because sometimes he may be right. In these days of public suffering and the impacts of high taxes anything that can set the public mood is well received. One of his siren calls is to freeze public salaries and for Councils to take a wage cut. Whether that is a correct thing to do is debatable, what is not is the sentiment that wage increases for one sector are not on. With the private sector being hammered with job losses and a poor recovery,  wage increases are just a pipe dream for most people.

So what do we find on the Council agenda tonight? A proposal to give the non-union staff a 2.5% increase in their wages. Is this setting the right example for restraint and if salaries are 75% of out municipal tax billl what is the tax impact? And more importantly as we come into the bargaining season is this the minimum raise to be given, or do we pick favourites and give the cops the 2.5% and then force the Public Works to accept half of that as is done most bargaining seasons.

A week of hot air

This week has been a puzzling one for pundits. On one hand you have Minister Clement holding tight to his decision to abolish the long form of the census. On the other you have just about every organised group in the Country and all those who rely on the data inside the long form complaining very loudly. Finally you have the Head Statisticion resigning in a very public manner saying not only can he not be part of a system that uses skewed data but complaining that he may be subordinate to the Minister but the information isn't.

The move to abolish the long form and replace it with a voluntary survey that will be sent to more homes will not provide reliable data and is based on dogma. That's the view of the opponents. Minister Clement says that the form is intrusive and punishes those who refuse to participate with jail terms. 

The move to abolish census forms is a conservative phenomenom that is being replicated by newly elected NeoCon governments. Posh-boy  Cameron even vows to abolish the census all together in five years. The reason is that because governments set public policy on statistics if you have no stats then you can freely enact silly but neo-con legislation. The classic example is the Harpercrits move to spend billions of our tax money on crime bills when crime is declining. Without the StatsCan figures nobody can contradict the mantra that crime is rising, when it is obviously not.

It is not certain if the Cons will change their minds, perhaps they won't until internal polling shows that is either a winner or a loser. All it does is expose the hamhanded political moves of our Prime Minister, enough of them will dent his reputation, and we can hardly wait for it to happen.

Just what is going here?

We have two prolific writers in Cobourg. One gets paid to do it and one just , well does it. Professor Robert Washburn, a former journalist for the Cobourg Daily Star and now a Professor of New Media Studies at Loyalist College writes a  biweekly opinion piece for the CDS   NorthumberlandToday. His style is to apply his journalistic skill to the problems of the day, usually municipal issues and point out faults in the system for those who may not be aware of the finer points of current issues.

The other guy, is a person who's been around the block many times in his career as a watchdog of Council, he even ran in the last election for Deputy Mayor against Gil Brocanier. But in his latest series of letters to the editor Manfred Schumann is causing local watchers to wonder just what is really going on. Now that he has finished flailing Gil Brocanier for whatever perceived sins of the day he may or may not have committed he has picked up on Washburn's columns. His latest rebuttal of the the last column is here and it follows the style of the last rebuttal of the previous column - a really milqutoaste and prosaic criticism of the column but the thrust of the rebuttal is simple - lay off the criticism of Council they are doing the best they can. Surprising support from a guy who has had nothing but scorn for some of the positions that Council has previously taken.

Perhaps as Councillor Turck of Port Hope said last week about an asinine comment made by Jeff Lees's comments about Council remuneration, "It must be an election year!'

Manfred has not made a decision about filing nomination papers yet, or if he has he hasn't made them public. Maybe he has decided after all these years, "You have to go along to get along!"

A Guest Post - one from Dan

Dan Christie

Two weeks ago I was on Vancouver Island -mostly to attend the Vancouver Island Music Festival halfway up-island near Courtnay/Comox. Comox of course is home to  a large Canadian Forces Base. I also spent ten days in Victoria where just across the harbour is another military base, Esquimalt, the west coast headquarters of Canada's navy.

While there is a stretch of road called The Veteran's Memorial Highway just north of Victoria, there doesn't seem to be anything as openly promoted as Ontario's Highway Of Heroes. As a matter of fact almost nothing about the military seems as openly promoted in B.C. as it is in Ontario. Sure, because it happens to be the 100th Anniversary of the Canadian Navy, Wharf Street in Victoria is festooned with tasteful banners on lamp posts honouring the occassion.

But what I didn't see (and believe me by Day 3 I was actively looking) was a single "We Support The Troops" bumper sticker. Not a one.

Why is this? Does it have something to do with the euphamism 'The Left Coast'-the laid back attitude brought on by mountains, sea breezes and hehheh...good shit?

Or are we here in Ontario just more of a redneck persuasion -given to more overt displays of patriotism -especially really maudlin patriotism- than other parts  of the country? And if so, how much of a role do small town newspapers play in pushing that patriotism?

Psychologically, I already live in a small two-bedroom in James Bay. All that remains is to sell everything -including two snowblowers- and move.

Is this the end of the Rinaldi regime?

Lou Rinaldi has been coasting and it shows. A pathetic defence of Provincial decisions and a lacklustre performance in the recent Hospital cuts debate has not helped his image a a dynamic MPP, but what did?

With Lou's performance in the background the shocking announcement from Brighton's Mayor, Christine Herrington, that she has pulled her nomination papers from the 2010 election speculation will abound about her motives.

So are the two circumstances related? There has always been a rumour that CH wants to be more than a small town Mayor and she even participated in the Federal Liberal nomination contest.

Our money is on Lou announcing that he will not run again early next year, CH grabbing the brass ring and going for the election in 2011

While on Lib politics - on a trip downtown yesterday morning  bumped into candidate Kim Rudd. Complete with a guy following her around with a camcorder on a tripod she was gladhanding at the Farmers' Market. Wonder where Rick Norlock is these days, sitting pretty on his newly acquired pension he probably doesn't care much? As long as he carries his blackberry ready to receive the latest talking points from the propaganda centre, it doesn't matter where he is the message will still get out.

Charity Cannot Fix Canada's Affordable Housing crisis

Our esteemed host on the Burd Report today asked why Habitat for Humanity has become such a popular organization, crammed with A-list volunteers and boosters, along with government at all levels.

The answer becomes apparent when we think about how charitable groups operate and how they are different from government mandated social programs that are applied with standard eligibility criteria across the board.

All charities, particularly Habitat, continually promote their dedication to helping "deserving families". The ugly term "deserving children" is even heard, as if any child could be undeserving of basic needs. But the charity gets to decide what deserving means and exactly who meets that criteria. Contrast that with social programs which start from the premise that everyone who meets the well known financial criteria qualifies for the program.

The key difference is our social programs are based on our beliefs in equality and justice. If a need has been established and it is the government's mandate to meet that need, impartial standards are set to ensure fairness in the program's application. That doesn't solve the problem of sometimes lengthy waiting lists, but does guarantee everybody is treated the same.

But the charity has too much power that often goes unchallenged. Those rejected as "undeserving" are often not told why, and certainly don't have the appeal rights a rejected applicant to a government program enjoys. The charity calls all the shots.

That's a major reason charities are loved by right wing groups like the Fraser Institute. They point out in one of their books by Chris Sarlo that the beauty of charity is that one can withdraw support if one decides they don't like what the charity is doing. Like maybe helping someone the donor deems to be undeserving. United Way worries about that and encourages their agencies to keep donor happiness at the top of the pinnacle, even having a role in what kind of services the agencies can provide.

Our friends at the Fraser Insititute actually advocate that government get out of providing social programs altogether, and let charities take over completely. That way they can weed out the undeserving and ensure all help provided is based on undefined standards set by the privileged donor set.

This battle between the principles of charity and justice has been raging since government in civilised countries began making provisions for the disadvantaged, reducing the role of the church parrish in doling out bread and shelter. We need to make sure that justice wins, and that people understand the difference.