Sandra Finley

2014-03-21 Marc Nadon appointment rejected by Supreme Court

 Corporatocracy or Democracy or Administrative State or WHAT?, Rocco Galati, Rule of Law  No Responses »
Mar 242014
 

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/marc-nadon-appointment-rejected-by-supreme-court-1.2581388

 

Marc Nadon cannot take his seat on the Supreme Court of Canada, the court’s justices said Friday, in an unprecedented move that blocks Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s latest appointment to the top court.

In a six-to-one decision, a majority of justices on the top court ruled that Nadon doesn’t qualify to join them on the court.

■Read the Supreme Court ruling on the Nadon question

■Storify: Twitter reacts to ‘jaw-dropping’ Supreme Court ruling​

The court ruled that its composition is constitutionally protected, and Parliament’s attempt to change the Supreme Court Act through a budget bill is unconstitutional.

The government introduced changes in last December’s budget bill in an effort to make Nadon eligible as a former member of the Quebec bar — as opposed to a current member. The court says that section is void because the government does not have the power to make such amendments unilaterally.

Changes to the court’s makeup require a constitutional amendment with the unanimous consent of the provinces, the court says.

Nadon’s appointment to the country’s top court is declared void retroactively, and he is deemed to have never been sworn in.

A spokesman for Prime Minister Stephen Harper said Friday afternoon the government is “genuinely surprised” by the decision.

“Prior to Justice Nadon’s appointment, the Department of Justice received legal advice from a former Supreme Court justice, which was reviewed and supported by another former Supreme Court justice, as well as a leading constitutional scholar. None of them saw any merit in the position taken by the court,” Stephen Lecce said in a statement.

“We will review the details of the decision and our options going forward.”

 

Implications for Senate reference

 

“Today’s judgment will be of great importance, especially in constitutional matters,” said Sébastien Grammond, who represented two groups of retired Quebec judges in the case. “First and foremost because it makes important statements as to how the Constitution of Canada can be amended.”

The decision may also provide insight into how the court will rule on the Senate reference,  Grammond suggested, which includes the question of whether Parliament can reform the Senate without reopening the Constitution.

“It will take months and years perhaps to understand” all the implications of the decision, he said.

Toronto lawyer Rocco Galati had challenged Harper’s appointment of Nadon. Galati argued he didn’t qualify for one of the court’s three Quebec seats, because he came from the Federal Court and not from a Quebec court.

Quebec judges are a special category because of the province’s unique civil legal code, different from the common law applied in the rest of the country.

Harper referred the question to the court and Nadon stepped aside until the matter could be decided.

Nadon has been collecting a salary since he was named. It’s now up to the registrar of the Supreme Court to decide whether he has to pay the  money back, likely the first time the court has ever faced this question. Nadon’s annual salary would have been $351,700. He was named in October, so has been receiving a pay cheque for about six months.

One option the registrar is considering is having Nadon repay the difference between the Supreme Court and Federal Court salaries.

 

Court silent on some questions

In its ruling, the court repudiated the government’s claim that Nadon was eligible because the Constitution does not actually say he has to be a “current” member of the Quebec bar.

“In our view,” the ruling says, “the answer to this question is no: a current judge of the Federal Court of Appeal is not eligible for appointment under [section 6] as a person who may be appointed ‘from among the advocates of that province.’ This language requires that, at the time of appointment, the appointee be a current member of the Quebec bar with at least 10 years standing.”

The court is silent on whether Nadon could be appointed from another province, or whether he could simply re-join the Quebec bar, where he began his career, and then be properly named.

Justice Michael Moldaver was the only dissenter from today’s ruling.

Justice Marshall Rothstein, also appointed from the Federal Court, recused himself. He has given no public reasons for that, but it removes the perception of a conflict of interest.

Rothstein is from Manitoba and remains on the Supreme Court because the rules governing Quebec appointments are different. They impose additional requirements, the Supreme Court says, which Nadon does not meet.

Three of the six justices who ruled against Nadon’s appointment were appointed by Harper, as was Moldaver. The remaining three justices who ruled against the appointment were appointed by previous governments.

 

Quebec missing judge

 

New Democrat justice critic Françoise Boivin said it has been a year now that Quebec has gone without one of its judges on the Supreme Court.

She said Justice Minister Peter MacKay should follow the existing process: talk to lawyers in Quebec and consult the chief justice of Quebec’s Superior Court, the Quebec bar association and the Canadian Bar Association.

“It’s hard to play politics with that decision,” she said. “We shouldn’t play politics, in my book, with justice issues like this.”

“I feel for Justice Nadon this morning. He in no way is responsible for anything that is happening right now.”

Boivin was on the committee of MPs that advised on a final list of candidates from which Harper chose Nadon. She said it wasn’t a unanimous decision

2014-03-24 Snowden, Vancouver, TED Talks

 Edward Snowden, Glenn Greenwald, Ladar Levison, Privacy of Personal Information; Charter Right; Surveillance; StatsCan Censuses & Surveys  No Responses »
Mar 242014
 

Edward Snowden made a surprise visit on TED Talks March 18th in Vancouver.

More than 100,000 people are watching the video every day.

 

http://on.ted.com/j07uc

 

Just watch the video, if you haven’t already.

If you have time for more, read on.  But not at the expense of watching the video!

 

Cheers!     Sandra

= = = = = = = = = = = = = =  =

 

March 18:   the Snowden video is posted

BY March 23:   805,203   views of it.

BY March 24:   942,215   views

 

You may experience the same high as I have?

 

To me, it’s about more than surveillance, internet freedom and data privacy.

 

Edward Snowden gives a glimpse of the future.   He gives me hope.    We have THE TOOLS to work our way through the mess we’re in.

 

Hallelujah!  We are creating a watershed moment in history.

Crossing over a divide,

leaving waters that flow into the ocean of self-destruction.

We have to discover where the waters on this side of the divide will take us.

It is an exciting time of adventure, with challenges.     . . .

 

A new acquaintance was surprised when I spoke of activism work.  She said, “You don’t look like the type.  You look like a nice quiet person”.    Ha! Ha!  And I had not even gotten onto the topic of Lockheed Martin and the census!

 

It reminded me:  I expected to exchange niceties with a sweet older woman who sings in the Island Soul Choir.  …  but don’t read a book by its cover!   We were soon plotting a time to discuss how we could mobilize community members around a local issue.  Good Lord,  She is a Revolutionary!

 

Which reminds me of the Soul Choir itself.   A hundred and fifty people.

They look . . .  ordinary.

They talk  . . . ordinary.

Like Edward Snowden . . . ordinary.

 

But listen to the lyrics they’re belting out.  Singing and rockin’,  Revolution.

 

I’m a living sunset, lightning in my bones,

Push me to the edge

But my will is stone

‘Cause I believe in a better way.   . . .

 

I will look the world straight in the eyes  . . .

What good is a man who won’t take a stand?

What good is a cynic with no better plan? . . .

 

Hope these words feel pleasant as they rest upon your ears

Reality is sharp

It cuts at me like a knife.

Ev’ryone I know is in the fight of their life

Cause I believe in a better way.

 

Take your face out of your hands

And clear your eyes  …

 

It’s not just ONE song, here’s another from the repertoire:

go out and make some noise . . .

put down your toys

the world needs your voice

and it sure could use your light

 

There’s no doubt about it

youʼve got to be your own light  . . .

 

We are making the eloquent words of former president of the United States, General Dwight Eisenhower come true.   It may have taken fifty years for us to do it!  but I don’t think it could have happened earlier.

 

The missing ingredient was something that Ed Snowden talks about:  the ability to connect with people all around the world.    (Snowden, Vancouver:  http://on.ted.com/j07uc)

 

Western countries have to be stopped, for example, from dropping bombs out of unmanned drones, terrorizing people in other countries.  But so also, do the leaders of other countries have to be stopped from their brutalities.   Ordinary people around the Planet understand that we have to change our ways.   We are connected and working together on a thousand both common and different fronts to make things better.

 

Edward Snowden WON against the NSA.   He could do that because of the earlier work of Julian Assange and Chelsea (formerly Bradley) Manning.

 

I think we also helped:

Lockheed Martin’s work in the world is the same as the NSA:  surveillance.

It is accomplished through data capture on individual citizens.

There isn’t a separation between the NSA and Lockheed Martin.

Canadian activists said “NO” to Lockheed Martin, starting back in 2003.

 

I don’t think we would have

  • so clearly understood the need to stand steadfastly behind Assange, Manning, Snowden and Greenwald
  • and shared that understanding with so many other Canadians over the last ten years

if we had not become active resisters of Lockheed Martin.

 

So, the work of those four (Assange, Manning, Snowden and Greenwald) was aided by our work.  More people “got it”.  Which made it almost impossible for a successful propaganda campaign to be mounted by the American military-industrial-congressional complex, against Snowden.

 

By the way:

  • UPDATE  re Eve Stegenga, a delightful young woman from Powell River BC, who is on trial over Lockheed Martin and the 2011 census:   I attended Eve’s pretrial (March) – a daunting road ahead for her.   BUT NOW!  Wonderful serendipity, angels to the rescue and it’s looking good!   Will keep you posted.  The trial itself is likely a few months in the offing.
  • UPDATE  re StatsCan, data collection through SURVEYS:   The traffic to my blog from people who google for information because they are feeling harassed by StatsCan continues unabated.  “Comments” (usually questions) get posted to different pages.  A couple from last week, with my responses,  are at the bottom of Are StatsCan surveys mandatory? Interpretation of the Law.

 

BUT GETTING BACK TO EISENHOWER who spoke in relation to war.

Our “war” today is as much against the environment and the FUTURE, as it is against our fellow inhabitants of the Earth.

 

EXCERPTS FROM EISENHOWER

I hate war as only a soldier who has lived it can, only as one who has seen its brutality, its futility, its stupidity.

I like to believe that people in the long run are going to do more to promote peace than our governments. Indeed, I think that people want peace so much that one of these days governments had better get out of the way and let them have it.

Dwight D. Eisenhower, From a speech before the American Society of Newspaper Editors, April 16, 1953:

Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and not clothed. This world in arms is not spending money alone. It is spending the sweat of its laborers, the genius of its scientists, the hopes of its children. This is not a way of life at all in any true sense. Under the cloud of threatening war, it is humanity hanging from a cross of iron.

The problem in defense is how far you can go without destroying from within what you are trying to defend from without.
A people that values its privileges above its principles soon loses both.


Public Papers of the Presidents, Dwight D. Eisenhower, 1960, p. 1035- 1040

Full text: http://www.h-net.org/~hst306/documents/indust.html

EXCERPT:

Our military organization today bears little relation to that known by any of my predecessors in peacetime, or indeed by the fighting men of World War II or Korea.

Until the latest of our world conflicts, the United States had no armaments industry. American makers of plowshares could, with time and as required, make swords as well. But now we can no longer risk emergency improvisation of national defense; we have been compelled to create a permanent armaments industry of vast proportions. Added to this, three and a half million men and women are directly engaged in the defense establishment. We annually spend on military security more than the net income of all United States corporations.

This conjunction of an immense military establishment and a large arms industry is new in the American experience. The total influence — economic, political, even spiritual — is felt in every city, every State house, every office of the Federal government. We recognize the imperative need for this development. Yet we must not fail to comprehend its grave implications. Our toil, resources and livelihood are all involved; so is the very structure of our society.

In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.

We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted. Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty may prosper together.

Akin to, and largely responsible for the sweeping changes in our industrial-military posture, has been the technological revolution during recent decades.

In this revolution, research has become central; it also becomes more formalized, complex, and costly. A steadily increasing share is conducted for, by, or at the direction of, the Federal government.

Today, the solitary inventor, tinkering in his shop, has been overshadowed by task forces of scientists in laboratories and testing fields. In the same fashion, the free university, historically the fountainhead of free ideas and scientific discovery, has experienced a revolution in the conduct of research. Partly because of the huge costs involved, a government contract becomes virtually a substitute for intellectual curiosity. For every old blackboard there are now hundreds of new electronic computers.

The prospect of domination of the nation’s scholars by Federal employment, project allocations, and the power of money is ever present

  • and is gravely to be regarded.

Yet, in holding scientific research and discovery in respect, as we should, we must also be alert to the equal and opposite danger that public policy could itself become the captive of a scientific technological elite.

It is the task of statesmanship to mold, to balance, and to integrate these and other forces, new and old, within the principles of our democratic system — ever aiming toward the supreme goals of our free society.

V.

Another factor in maintaining balance involves the element of time. As we peer into society’s future, we — you and I, and our government — must avoid the impulse to live only for today, plundering, for our own ease and convenience, the precious resources of tomorrow. We cannot mortgage the material assets of our grandchildren without risking the loss also of their political and spiritual heritage. We want democracy to survive for all generations to come, not to become the insolvent phantom of tomorrow.

VI.

Down the long lane of the history yet to be written America knows that this world of ours, ever growing smaller, must avoid becoming a community of dreadful fear and hate, and be instead, a proud confederation of mutual trust and respect.

Such a confederation must be one of equals. The weakest must come to the conference table with the same confidence as do we, protected as we are by our moral, economic, and military strength. That table, though scarred by many past frustrations, cannot be abandoned for the certain agony of the battlefield.

Disarmament, with mutual honor and confidence, is a continuing imperative. Together we must learn how to compose differences, not with arms, but with intellect and decent purpose. Because this need is so sharp and apparent I confess that I lay down my official responsibilities in this field with a definite sense of disappointment. As one who has witnessed the horror and the lingering sadness of war — as one who knows that another war could utterly destroy this civilization which has been so slowly and painfully built over thousands of years — I wish I could say tonight that a lasting peace is in sight.

Happily, I can say that war has been avoided. Steady progress toward our ultimate goal has been made. But, so much remains to be done. As a private citizen, I shall never cease to do what little I can to help the world advance along that road. . . .

These are difficult but exhilarating times.

I hope you are having fun!

2014-03-21 Mercury fillings: Best Health On-line Magazine doesn’t publish my input re Internationl Treaty

 Freedom of Speech. (Remove some wrong postings from category), Mercury poisoning, dental amalgams. See also Vaccinations.  No Responses »
Mar 212014
 

Grant tried to post rebuttal information to an article on dental fillings on the “Best Health Magazine” website.

I tried (March 21).  The article omits any mention of the International Treaty.   I received notification that my input was under consideration.

March  29 – –  I assume they decided against posting the info.   It’s not there.

GRANT WRITES:

Hi….please read this short news article on mercury / amalgam. The ever so wise in Canada are saying amalgam is no problem! I am so glad they put my mind at ease…..they left no facility for me to comment on their wonderful report.

http://www.besthealthmag.ca/get-healthy/oral-health/are-dental-fillings-safe

 

SANDRA REPLIES:   March-21-14

Subject:  Grant – I posted this to the HG article. It is waiting for approval

Hi Grant,

Will be interesting to see if my comment gets approved!!

This is what I posted:

I find this article to be disingenuous. 

Credibility requires at least a MENTION of the U.N. negotiations on mercury reduction, the fifth and final round of which concluded in January 2013.  Canada was party to the negotiations and agreements.  We are part of the international community that is striving to stop the use of products that contain mercury.  I don’t think I need to go into the reasons why that would be. 

Google the UN Treaty on Mercury.   

The “Parties” to the Treaty agreed to phased-in cessation of the use of dental amalgam (50% mercury). 

TEXT from the treaty: 

[1] UNEP(DTIE)/Hg/INC.5/CRP.4618, January 2013 

Article 6, Annex C, Part II, Dental amalgam Provisions 

Measures to be taken by a Party to phase down the use of dental amalgam shall take into account the Party’s domestic circumstances and relevant international guidance and shall include two or more of the measures from the following list: 

(i) Setting national objectives aiming at dental caries prevention and health promotion, thereby minimising the need for dental restoration; 

(ii) Setting national objectives aiming at minimising its use; 

(iii) Promoting the use of cost-effective and clinically effective mercury-free alternatives for dental restoration; 

(iv) Promoting research and development of quality mercury-free materials for dental restoration; 

(v) Encouraging representative professional organisations and dental schools to educate and train dental professionals and students on the use of mercury-free dental restoration alternatives and on promoting best management practices; 

(vi) Discouraging insurance policies, and programmes that favour dental amalgam use over mercury-free dental restoration; 

(vii) Encouraging insurance policies and programmes that favour the use of quality alternatives to dental amalgam for dental restoration; 

(viii) Restricting the use of dental amalgam to its encapsulated form; 

(ix) Promoting the use of best environmental practices in dental facilities to reduce releases of mercury and mercury compounds to water and land.

2014-03-05 U.S., Russia, Ukraine: Do as we say, not Do as we do. Petition to Obama. Well done.

 Corporatocracy or Democracy or Administrative State or WHAT?  No Responses »
Mar 052014
 

Share this action on       Facebook
Share this action on       Twitter

Mr. Obama: If     international law is so damn crucial, then stop violating it.

To     send the president a clear message in support of international law, click     here.

Days ago, responding to Russian military intervention in the Crimea,     President Obama denounced Russia for a “breach of international law.”

The Russian intervention deserves criticism. But let’s be clear. The     message from the White House is: Do as we say, not as we do.

The U.S. government routinely violates international law with drone strikes     in Pakistan, Yemen, Somalia and other countries, not to mention its own     interference in Ukraine’s government. Human-rights groups like Reprieve     have documented many of those violations in recent reports, and the     European Parliament has just condemned the practice as illegal — but the     USA’s missile attacks continue.

Click     here to tell President Obama that his tributes to international law are     worthless as long as he keeps violating it.

Some background articles below provide important context for the current     Ukraine crisis.

At this highly dangerous moment, please take action by signing     the petition and then forwarding this message to your friends.

Thank you!

—– The RootsAction.org Team

P.S. This work is only possible with your financial support. Please     donate.

Background:

www.RootsAction.org

2014-02-27 University: Non-confidence vote scheduled for reform process. Star Phoenix

 Freedom of Speech. (Remove some wrong postings from category), Take back the University  No Responses »
Feb 272014
 

http://www.thestarphoenix.com/news/confidence+vote+scheduled+reform+process/9556423/story.html

By Jason Warick, The Starphoenix

 

A non-confidence vote on the sweeping reform process at the University of Saskatchewan is expected today at a meeting of its influential university council.

“We’re expecting a good turnout. This has become an increasingly divisive issue on campus,” said Prof. Len Findlay, who crafted the motion coming to the council floor.

The council will debate a motion asking for an expression of non-confidence in the TransformUS process, one of several initiatives underway to fill what administrators believe is a potential $44.5-million budget shortfall. More than 300 professors, university staff and others have signed a non-confidence petition letter online in advance of the meeting.

Findlay said the few positive aspects of the work so far should be salvaged and then a new process undertaken. He said the reforms have been dictated by top-level administrators, rather than the traditional collegial model.

“It’s part of the creeping corporatization of universities,” he said.

Officials dispute this claim, saying all interested parties have been brought together to make decisions.

U of S provost and vicepresident academic Brett Fairbairn said TransformUS is one of several initiatives involved in the reform process. He said he welcomes all feedback, which has come from many different sources.

He said he couldn’t predict the outcome of Friday’s motion.

“I’m looking forward to the debate,” he said.

He said there is no escaping the fact more needs to be done. In 2012, U of S officials predicted a $44.5-million deficit by 2016 if the status quo continued. Workforce planning and job cuts have achieved roughly $15.5 million in savings so far, but that still leaves a gap of $29 million, he said.

“The university is facing a serious budget issue,” he said. “We have to get it under control.”

University of Saskatchewan Students Union executive members unanimously voted non-confidence in the process earlier this year.

The meeting is open to the public and is scheduled to begin at 2:30 p.m. at the Neatby-Timlin Lecture Theatre on campus.

 

2014-01-29 Two-tiered internet, Avaaz petition important

 AVAAZ, Freedom of Speech. (Remove some wrong postings from category)  No Responses »
Jan 292014
 

From: Pascal V. – Avaaz.org
Sent: January-29-14 1:07 PM
Subject: Internet Apocalypse?

 

Dear friends,

                                                                      The US and the EU are on the verge of giving rich corporations the right   to control what we all see on the Internet. It’s the apocalypse of the   Internet as we know it. But free speech advocates and web companies are   fighting back. Click to join the largest call for a democratic and free   Internet ever:

    

The richest 1% could now control what we all see on the Internet forever. It’s the apocalypse of the Internet as we know it, and will erase the democratic promise of an information highway for everyone the founders of the world wide web imagined.

Together, our community has built on that vision, using the web to fight corruption, save lives, and bring people-powered aid to countries in crisis. But the US and the EU are on the verge of giving the richest corporations the right to show content fast, while paywalling or slowing down everything else. Avaaz’s ability to show the world citizen journalist footage from Syria, or run campaigns to save our planet is under threat!

Decisions on both sides of the Atlantic are being made now. But tech innovators, free speech advocates and the best web companies are fighting back. If millions of us join them now we can create the largest call for a democratic and free Internet ever. Sign up now and tell everyone:

http://www.avaaz.org/en/internet_apocalypse_loc/?bYHahab&v=34949

Until now, any improvements in the speed and functioning of the Internet benefited all of us — if Rupert Murdoch’s ultra-conservative Fox News got a faster way to stream videos, it also benefitted independent media showing reality on the ground in Ukraine, Syria, or Palestine. Politicians called this “net neutrality” and laws protecting it used to exist in the United States until a court just struck them down. Now, the EU Parliament is threatening to pass regulation that give ISPs the right to carve up the web and control what we see, by slowing down or charging for sites that don’t pay.

But we can stop this. First, we will show up with massive global numbers into this week’s public meeting in the United States to decide whether to reinstate Internet protections. Then we will unleash a high powered lobby team to target the EU Parliament to ensure its committees listen to the public. This will be the big first step we need to win these important battles over the next few months.

Web providers like Verizon and Vodafone are lobbying hard for an Internet for the rich. And without a massive response from citizens, they could win, and put our whole community’s work at risk. Most of our Internet is located in the US and the EU so this affects us all. We don’t have any time to lose. Click below to join now:

http://www.avaaz.org/en/internet_apocalypse_loc/?bYHahab&v=34949

When our community was less than half of the size it is now, we rallied and helped kill the ACTA treaty and stopped massive Internet censorship laws SOPA/PIPA. Today, we are more powerful than ever. Let’s now join together and ensure that what connects us all stays open.

With hope,

Pascal, Emma, Dalia, Luis, Emilie, Luca, Sayeeda and the whole Avaaz team

SOURCES:

On dangers of non-Network Neutrality (ABC news):
http://abcnews.go.com/Business/major-ways-internet-change-net-neutrality/story?id=21541399

Save the Internet
http://savetheinternet.eu/en/

EU telecoms market reforms threaten net neutrality and privacy (Wired)
http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/2013-11/19/eu-telecoms-reform-concerns

Federal court strikes down FCC net neutrality rules (The Verge)
http://www.theverge.com/2014/1/14/5307650/federal-court-strikes-down-net-neutrality-rules

Summary of BEREC positions on net neutrality (BEREC)
http://berec.europa.eu/files/document_register_store/2012/12/BoR_(12)_146_Summary_of_BEREC_positions_on_net_neutrality2.pdf

Support   the Avaaz Community!
We’re   entirely funded by donations and receive no money from governments or   corporations. Our dedicated team ensures even the smallest contributions go a   long way.

 


Avaaz.org is a 32-million-person global campaign network that works to ensure that the views and values of the world’s people shape global decision-making. (“Avaaz” means “voice” or “song” in many languages.) Avaaz members live in every nation of the world; our team is spread across 18 countries on 6 continents and operates in 17 languages. Learn about some of Avaaz’s biggest campaigns here, or follow us on Facebook or Twitter.

 

2014-01-11 Hooray! Research, Canada, on neonics (chemicals killing bees and other pollinators). Star Phoenix

 Freedom of Speech. (Remove some wrong postings from category), Health, Sustainability, Take back the University, Water  1 Response »
Jan 282014
 

Congratulations to Professor  Christy Morrissey at the University of Saskatchewan!  See the article below,  U of S research serves as check.

#neonics  #bees  #pollinators  #MarchAgainstMonsanto

Thank-you Christy:

  • Not just for doing the Research on neonics (the chemicals that are killing bees & other pollinators).
  • But also for being willing to speak up.

There will be attempts to discredit Christy Morrissey.  The chemical / biotech corporations are too entrenched at the U of S for it to be otherwise.

Following the article:  copy of the email I sent to Christy,

 

RELATED:

    1. The Year the Monarch Didn’t Appear, New York Times, Jim Robbins
    2. Very Important Video: Ronnie Cummins on Turning the Tide Against Monsanto.
    3. Bees and agro-industry – your attention needed
    4. Informative: Russia Warns Obama: Monsanto GMO. Global War Over “Bee Apocalypse” Coming Soon, EU Times
    5. The Counter-Enlightenment, How government science advisers misrepresent science. Guardian, Monbiot. (Bees, EU neo nic ban)
    6. A win! Bee-harming pesticides banned in Europe, The Guardian
    7. Biotech giants Monsanto, Bayer, Syngenta, DuPont, BASF and Dow face trial for ‘systematic human rights abuses’

 

Note:

  • January 27th, Star Phoenix, CropLife Canada (the industry lobbyists) wrote their usual ”  no problem with neonics ..  We are the most highly regulated industry .. “
  • Many of the March Against Monsanto (MAM) groups have a “Save the Bees” component,  to raise awareness of the neonics.   Is there a  MAM  group in your community?  . . .  click on  Z  to find out.   The next March is   May 24, 2014.  Become involved.  It’s a way to support what Christy is doing.

 

U of S research serves as check

http://www.thestarphoenix.com/technology/research+serves+check/9375823/story.html

The Star Phoenix January 11, 2014

 

The research being done by University of Saskatchewan assistant Prof. Christy Morrissey on the presence and impact of neonicotinoid pesticides on prairie wetlands underlines why Canada needs to support the work of independent scientists as a check on claims by industry groups in marketing agricultural products.

Neonicotinoids are a relatively new pesticide that entered the market in the early 2000s, but their use as a seed coating has grown during the past five years and nearly all of the canola grown in Manitoba, Saskatchewan and Alberta is now treated with it.

Ms. Morrissey told CBC reporter Geoff Leo that she’s alarmed by the early findings of her four-year study, with sampling by researchers of hundreds of Prairie wetlands showing that more than 80 per cent to 90 per cent of these areas are contaminated with neonicotinoids.

What’s of even greater concern is that they found the chemical in the water before spring seeding, suggesting the chemicals persist in the water for months. The presence of the pesticide in concentrations at least three times greater – and in some cases 100 times more – than what’s been deemed tolerable for insect habitat can be devastating to bugs that range from mites to mosquitoes, which are a prime food source for birds and waterfowl. While Ms. Morrissey notes there’s a lot of evidence to indicate that bird and insect populations are declining, she admits any role played in the wetlands ecosystem by nicotinoids isn’t clear.

However, that’s a far cry from the reports issued by chemical manufacturers and industry lobby group CropLife Canada. They say that what they call “neonics” have been rigorously tested and found to be safe since being introduced to the market, and that there’s no reason to believe the chemical persists in the water for long periods. This research in Europe and North America was conducted by the companies, and Ms. Morrissey’s study is the first in Canada to investigate the effect on wetlands of the widespread use of neonics, which she conservatively estimates were used on 44 per cent of Prairie croplands in the year she reviewed.

“This class of insecticide had extremely low toxicity to humans, extremely low toxicity to other mammals as well as birds and fish,” CropLife spokesman Pierre Petelle told CBC. However, note that insects, which play a huge role in the wetlands ecosystem, aren’t mentioned.

While the manufacturers have consistently said no direct evidence exists to connect neonics to declining bee populations, the European Union last April placed a two-year ban on the chemical after complaints from apiarists. Even Health Canada’s pest management regulatory authority has raised concerns about the possible impact of neonics on bees in Ontario, Quebec and Manitoba, where treated seeds are used to grow corn.

In this context, the work of researchers such as Ms. Morrissey is invaluable, not only to push chemical companies to reassess their studies and public claims, but to serve as a reminder to a province such as Saskatchewan, which is turning over more environmental stewardship responsibility to farmers and ranchers, of the need for scientific rigour and independent oversight.

The editorials that appear in this space represent the opinion of The StarPhoenix. They are unsigned because they do not necessarily represent the personal views of the writers. The positions taken in the editorials are arrived at through discussion among the members of the newspaper’s editorial board, which operates independently from the news departments of the paper.

© Copyright (c) The StarPhoenix

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

I EMAILED PROFESSOR MORRISSEY:
Sent: January-28-14 1:55 PM
To: Christy Morrissey

Subject: Your researh on neonics. Thank-you so much.

 

Dear Christy,

 

Your work is a wonderful contribution to the welfare of the people in Saskatchewan and in Canada.

 

Whether you count that first, or the contribution to the health of the environment and its creatures first, is not material.

I have posted the article at http://sandrafinley.ca/?p=12302  and will email it into networks.

The posting  (titled  Hooray! Research, Canada, on neonics (chemicals killing bees and other pollinators). Star Phoenix)   has commentary and links to seven articles circulated into networks in the last year.  It is important for you to know that there ARE informed people who are very grateful for your work and voice.

When time permits, I’ll post to all the Canadian and some American March Against Monsanto facebook groups.   Many of them share information about the neonics and are connected with the Save the Bees networks.

Thank-you so much for being willing to speak up about the neonics.

The stranglehold of the chemical / biotech corporations at the University AND in the Pest Management Regulatory Agency (PMRA) of the Federal Government are the reason there has been a paucity of research in Canada on neonics.

You may or may not know an earlier statistic:  the Canadian market for roughly ONE THIRD of ag chemicals is in Saskatchewan.   The industry will be watching you closely.

It is very important that you and your work are supported.

I’ve had run-ins.  A federal scientist with the PMRA, located in Innovation Place, threatened to sue me a few years ago (to silence my voice).  I replied that the industry is well-known for using the threat of the justice system to silence critics.  No different than the mafia using the threat of broken bones.

I am an elected Senator, University of Saskatchewan.   I have received the same threat of legal action against me, from the U (arising out of a challenge to the conflicts-of-interest at the U).   I replied in the same vein as to the PMRA scientist.

In neither case did I hear another word.  They are bullies and intimidators.

You are on solid ground.   But that doesn’t mean that there won’t be attempts to discredit you.   I used to maintain a list of the scientists that the industry has gone after.  They cannot do it so freely these days – – too many people are onto them and share information.

Please feel free to get in touch anytime, if I might be of assistance.

 

All the best to you, Christy.

 

Sandra Finley

2014-01-23 Provincial candidate?

 X1B Postings  No Responses »
Jan 232014
 

From: John Murney  Sent: January 23, 2014 8:22 PM To: Sandra Finley Cc: VictorGRN Lau RobertGRN Cosbey  Subject: Re: CHANGE: Ashu Solo

Hi Sandra,

Based on his behaviour and his penchant for sending angry, there is no way Ashu would be allowed to become a provincial candidate either. We’ve had the misfortune of being somewhat diverted by this controversy. As we speed up election planning and he becomes ignored, I expect Ashu will fade away.

Thank you for clarifying the matter about the GPC ethics committee – I was unclear about that.

Onward, John

 

On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 10:14 PM, Sandra Finley wrote:

Thanks John.

I should just clarify re the GPC.  Re your . I look foward to what the GPC Ethics Committee has to say about the report you have filed.

The short reply:  (I hate to take away what you are looking forward to!)   It is possible that there will not be a reply.

I have not received an official notice, and I don’t expect to.  There is the difficulty over what CAN be done if he is not a member.  The complaint I submitted was contingent:  IF he takes out a membership, THEN the complaint can be activated.

But in addition, Ashu is no longer taken seriously.   Dealing with him is not productive.  He diverts time and energy from what is important.

Ashu has blown his credibility with the Federal Party through his relentless and ill-advised emails.  He included the federal organizer in a large number of the “100 emails” about me, in spite of her calls for “peace” and a request not to be included in his emails.  Didn’t win himself any Brownie points.

He did not have much credibility to begin with.  Early on (spring or summer 2013) he indicated that he wanted to be a candidate.  They did a background check and did not like what they found.  The feedback was “highly unlikely” to be accepted.  The verbal feedback:  even if there was no other candidate, they would not accept him, based on what they found.

At the EDA level in Saskatoon, which is where the decisive action must then be:  the debate today centred around the question of his participation.   I believe I can tell you with some confidence,  The likely outcome of the votes:  Ashu will not be allowed to attend any GPC events.

It may not even be an issue, inasmuch as he may “see” and just take his leave.

/Sandra

 

From: John Murney  Sent: January-23-14 5:54 PM To: Sandra Finley Cc: VictorGRN Lau; RobertGRN Cosbey Subject: Re: CHANGE: Ashu Solo

Hi Sandra, Sorry, I would have replied sooner, but its been a very full day. I think we all look forward to putting this matter behind us. For what it is worth, I am overwhelmed by the amount of work you put into this, Sandra. The enormity of it hit me like a ton of bricks, and while it is easy enough to absorb, it is disturbing to come to grips with. I look foward to what the GPC Ethics Committee has to say about the report you have filed or plan to file. In the meantime, it is indeed onward! There are Green MLAs and MPs to elect in this province, and I want to focus on that in the long run. Onward, John

 

On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 2:42 PM, Sandra Finley  wrote:

Hi John,

Update:

Took a different approach with the blogged info.  Some stuff removed.

Top is idea that if you understand how Ashu works, you can defend yourself, comes down to:   Ashu is very good at creating illusions & how he does it.

Password remains in place.

I would like it to work out such that Ashu takes down the two  Zimmerman blogs that he re-erected.

Still an effort to get Ashu to seek help.

Has been a long haul and very disruptive, but I think we will emerge intact and stronger!

This will all be behind us, very soon.

To quote you:  Onward!    There are elections in the offing!

Sandra

2014-01-22 Census – Lockheed Martin: Response to Janet Churnin found guilty

 Edward Snowden, Glenn Greenwald, Ladar Levison, Privacy of Personal Information; Charter Right; Surveillance; StatsCan Censuses & Surveys  6 Responses »
Jan 222014
 

I was asked for my thoughts on today’s news report (appended):

Janet Churnin was found guilty of not filling in the 2011 Census form.  

Note that the CP coverage does not even MENTION the leaks by Edward Snowden.  Small wonder that Europeans know about the NSA surveillance of them, but Canadians don’t.

MY REPLY:   (edited July 2014, at time of Stegenga trial over same issue.)

The Edward Snowden leaks about the extent and the means being used by the NSA to collect personal data on citizens leave no room for misunderstanding.   If the American surveillance system cannot collect every morsel of information on YOU through legitimate access to a data base, they do it illegally.

The statement in the news article on the Churnin case did not report the name of the StatsCan person quoted.  It would have been Yves Beland.  He is Director of Census Operations under  Wayne Smith, Chief Statistician:

Lockheed Martin had no access to the agency’s data operation centre or its census response database  

To me, the statement lacks credibility.  

Unless it is taken literally –  Lockheed HAD no access – – the past tense.

It HAS access now (present tense)  OR,  it WILL HAVE access in the future.

Given what is known through the leaks by Edward Snowden, reinforced by newspaper articles through the years (posted on this blog),  Canadians would have to be VERY gullible to believe that Lockheed Martin (the NSA) does not have back-door access to the data base at StatsCan.  The data base will be consolidated census records (with your name on your record) and “survey” data collection.

It is very frustrating to see another decision like this one on Janet Churnin, that completely ignores the reality of today’s world.   The so-called “influential” people in StatsCan, the Justice Department, and the Judiciary are marching us right into a surveillance state.   A police state.

Note that the “head of census operations at Statistics Canada”, by this news report, is now anonymous.  In fact, he does have a name.  It is important that Canadians know his name;  it is a means by which citizens hold Government officials accountable.

Wayne Smith
Chief Statistician of Canada since the summer of 2010
(I googled to ensure that he is still the head:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wayne_Smith_(Chief_Statistician_of_Canada)

It is wonderful that Canadians have citizens such as Janet Churnin who will stand up and be heard.  It would be wonderful if the decision in her case could be appealed.  But that is probably unrealistic.

It happens that Eve Stegenga, a young woman from Powell River BC, is the next one in the cross-hairs of the StatsCan – Justice Department duo.  A little serendipity:  I live not too far, a ferry ride away.

Eve’s next appearance in Court is in March.   I will be attending.

= = = = = = =  = = = = = = = = = = =  = = = = =

http://www.durhamregion.com/news-story/4328098-conditional-discharge-for-census-resister/

Conditional discharge for census resister

The Canadian Press, 2014

 

TORONTO – A 79-year-old Toronto woman has been handed a conditional discharge after being found guilty of violating the Statistics Act for refusing to fill out the mandatory census in 2011.

The sentence means Janet Churnin will have no permanent criminal record after she completes 50 hours of community service, but she’s on probation until then.

The judge presiding in the case disagreed with Churnin’s arguments that her Charter rights were violated, and found that the self-described pacifist had no lawful excuse for not participating in the census.

Churnin’s lawyer had argued at her trial that the government didn’t do enough to address her concerns about U.S. arms-maker Lockheed Martin’s role in the data collection process.

The Crown countered that Canadians can’t refuse to comply with legitimate government obligations simply on the basis of moral disapproval or speculative security fears.

Churnin has said she thought there was a chance information on Canada’s population could be accessed by Lockheed Martin, or even the American government if the corporation was forced to turn over the information under the U.S. Patriot Act.

The head of census operations at Statistics Canada testified that Lockheed Martin had no access to the agency’s data operation centre or its census response database.

 

By The Canadian Press

 Older Entries  Newer Entries