We know it's been very quiet around TDPC headquarters of late - life has been chaotic and the corgis have retreated to their crates and been sulking over various things. However, all that crate time appears to have paid off. We're back and with a red-hot exclusive story too; it turns out that Sam and his engineering team have been working on a top secret project for the Liberals. As far as we can tell, Iggy, strongly opposed to Canada's purchase of F-35 fighter jets and certain that he will soon become PM, has contracted with the Schnauzer-works division of Doggerel Labs to develop an alternative.
The new, unmanned drone will form the backbone of Liberal defense policy and will initially be deployed to defend Canada's Arctic against incursions by (to take a random example) Russian bombers.
Our reporters, armed with kibble and stuffy toys, have been able to extract from the corgis the key elements of the design of this new drone and also a spy photograph showing the weapon.
Ottawa police have recently come under fire (no pun intended) for shooting some stray moose in Ottawa neighborhoods. In response the city is hiring wildlife experts to help deal with problem animals.
As an extra measure to ensure the safety of the 'green' experts, police will be issued with a handy cut-out-and-keep guide to wildlife identification. One expert, speaking on condition of anonymity, told TDPC "We have a lot of problems with moose at this time of year. They get close to the city, and become convinced they can make it to the House of Commons. They're very dangerous when their hormones are up with that lust for power."
EXCLUSIVE: TDPC has learned that the UK Foreign Office staffer who composed the mocking memo that has called into question the state visit of Benedict XVI was inspired by an equally intelligent, sophisticated and universally admired former political staffer from Canada. The identity of the Canadian whose methods are so admired has not been revealed. However, it is believed the FO staffer had recently read a book by the name of "Kicking Ass in Canadian Politics."
when the corgis try their paws at this juxtaposing thing:
Liberal pollster Frank Graves:
the Liberal Party ... should invoke a “culture war” to battle the Conservatives. He described this as a battle between “cosmopolitanism versus parochialism, secularism versus moralism, Obama versus Palin, tolerance versus racism and homophobia, democracy versus autocracy. If the cranky old men in Alberta don’t like it, too bad. Go south and vote for Palin.”
Well, OK, we're not sure of the exact number. But allow the corgis to introduce you to Richard Grainer. Mr. Grainer is the subject of a feature article in today's Ottawa Citizen. It describes his long running battle with his landlord and his neighbors over fumes from a clothes dryer that he alleges have triggered 22 asthma attacks in his three year old son.
Now, asthma is a serious business, as Doggerelle well knows. And if, let's say, the landlord had been uncooperative and unconcerned, perhaps there might be grounds for Mr. Grainer to feel aggrieved. But the Citizen makes clear that the landlord has bent over backwards to accommodate Mr. Grainer and his son. They have moved the dryer vent to several different locations. They have attempted to locate and seal points in Mr. Grainer's apartment where the fumes might enter. Neighbors have experimented with not using softener sheets. And in the end Mr. Grainer is not satisfied, so off to the Human Rights Tribunal he goes.
Coincidentally, I am also the parent of a three year old boy. And also by coincidence, I have recently had first hand the experience of watching him stop breathing, albeit for only about 30 seconds. But I can tell you, that if I knew something in the environment where I was living meant that I would have to live those 30 seconds again, along with the 911 call, the ambulance ride, the anxious time in the ER... I would be out of there with my family before you could say "Barbara Hall." Even if I felt that my landlord hadn't taken care of things, care for the child trumps all principle, all stubbornness, all pride.
Not so for Mr. Grainer. This is a man who has already harassed one neighbor out of the triplex over a dog. Now he's on the Great Dryer Vent-etta, aided and abetted by all the usual Human Rights Industry suspects. Mr. Grainer won't move his son out of danger because, he says, he "likes living" where he is.
If only there were a Commission looking out for this little boy's right to responsible parental care.
The automotive world was rocked to its tires today with the news that on top of recall woes at Toyota, General Motors Canada is recalling approximately 900 workers.
A GM spokesman denied the problem was serious. However one analyst told TDPC "these workers are extremely dangerous. One minute your company is cruising along nicely, and the next they're demanding $74 an hour, striking every two years, costing a fortune in health benefits and before you can put the brakes on, your company has crashed and imploded."
If you believe you may be employing one of the affected workers, please ask them if they have a CAW membership card.
Another idea that would improve democracy would be to insist on respectful behaviour in the House of Commons. The existing leadership in the House could make a pact to obey the rules of the House. Those rules include that no interruptions are allowed when a member is speaking and that the minister’s answers must be responsive to the question. A zero-tolerance for heckling rule combined with answers that, at least, relate to the question, would vastly improve Canadians’ impressions of their government.
can't possibly be the Elizabeth May ranting at a turned off microphone at around 2:50 of this clip?
The Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario has issued its ruling in the case of the service chihuahua. The full ruling is reproduced below. Media coverage is here from CBC and here from the Ottawa Citizen (scroll down). Let's take a look.
First, the good news. Alex Allarie's complaint was dismissed. Vice Chair Leslie Reaume found that he had entered the store to provoke a confrontation and that he was not asked to leave for any reason involving his dog. Although CBC quotes Allarie as saying he intends to appeal, in reality this is not an option, since there is no right of appeal for HRTO rulings. There is an opportunity to request reconsideration, but this only applies if new material evidence is to be presented. The only other option would be for Allarie to request judicial review, which seems unlikely to happen and even less likely to succeed.
So far, so good. But let's look more closely at the wording of Ms. Reaume's ruling, shall we? Because, in fine Human Rights industry tradition, and following firmly in the footsteps of her Leader, Barbara Hall, Ms. Reaume isn't content to confine herself to a finding of facts. No good Human Rights ruling is complete without a drive-by smear, and Ms. Reaume lets loose on the Roubles, especially Leslie Rouble, in her ruling. She notes (emphasis mine):
The respondents were particularly hostile toward the applicant, the Tribunal and the human rights system in general. In her opening statement Ms. Rouble expressed considerable anger that the Tribunal would “gladly entertain Mr. Allarie’s ludicrous complaint” and outrage at being “compelled” to attend the hearing to be “interrogated” by the government.
and
I found Ms. Rouble, who gave the primary evidence for the respondents, extremely hostile and prone to exaggeration. Similarly, Ms. Robillard was hostile and argumentative with the Tribunal, initially refusing to comply with an order excluding witnesses. During her testimony she made it clear that she had her own concerns with Mr. Allarie as did several other local merchants. Her hostility toward Mr. Allarie was palpable and, after giving her evidence and returning to her seat, she had to be asked to stop interjecting in the proceeding to advocate for the respondents. In my view, the credibility of both Ms. Rouble and Ms. Robillard was affected by their approach to giving evidence before the Tribunal.
Nice character assassination there. Now, I was in the room for the hearing, and I know what's got Ms. Reaume's goat here. It's that the Roubles, quite politely but firmly, refused to shake her hand. Ms. Reaume was embarrassed, humiliated in front of a CBC camera, and clearly angry with them from then on. These words in the ruling serve no material purpose except to exact Ms. Reaume's revenge on the Roubles. On one level, this is simple cattiness, which we would expect from any of the HRT/HRC thugs. But I think it's rather more serious than that. Ms. Rouble actually determines that the credibility of Leslie Rouble's testimony is affected by her view of the Human Rights system. In other words, Leslie Rouble's politics determines the credibility of her evidence.
The sarcastic use of quotes around "compelled" and "interrogated" suggests that these are mischaracterizations of the process. But the Roubles were compelled by the HRTO to be there, and they were compelled to answer Ms. Reaume's questions. Those are facts.
As Kelly Egan in the Citizen points out, anyone subjected to the state sanctioned harrassment of the HRT process over a bogus, trumped up claim is bound to be hostile to the process. Furthermore, anyone who's read Shakedown is going to be hostile toward the human rights system in general. But as citizens of this country, we used to be entitled to be equal before the law no matter what our beliefs and opinions. No longer.
With Ms. Reaume in charge, you can expect to be found less credible unless you support the long arm of government thought control she represents. Resistance is futile.
Given that Leslie Reaume makes free with the character and reputation of honest, hard-working, decent people just because they upset her, it might be instructive to narrate a little story about her; after all, character affects credibility, no?
Ms. Reaume's name has been up in lights in a number of areas, most notably during her career as counsel at the Canadian Human Rights Commission. But she's famous for more than that. She's part of a textbook family law case.
While at Western, Ms. Reaume was married (to a man, just to be clear). Two of the professors in the feminist law world at UWO were also 'partnered' with each other in a lesbian relationship, in which one of them, Ms. Greaves, had born a child. This notwithstanding, Ms. Reaume entered into a lesbian relationship with Ms. Buist, the other partner, while still a student of hers. Eventually Ms. Greaves found out about the relationship and the couple seperated. Ms. Reaume also left her husband and moved in with Ms. Buist. Not content with breaking up the happy home, the Reaume-Buist coupling then spent years litigating to take the child away from his natural mother, Ms. Greaves.
Now, up here in backward, knuckle-dragging rural Ontario, we still tend to frown on homewrecking as an occupation. It's true that Ms. Reaume wasn't the first or last student to drop her panties for teacher, but we also think that bears on her character and her credibility. So as you read the ruling, why not remember who Ms. Reaume really is - and see how credible you think that makes this latest example of HRT excess.
Footnote: Ms. Reaume pocketed $105,828.78 in salary in 2008.
