Sandra Finley

2011-09-01 Natural health product recalled: excess mercury

 Mercury poisoning, dental amalgams. See also Vaccinations., Vaccinations (incl corruption of science & govt)  No Responses »
Sep 012011
 

Grant writes:  ….this is amazing…..these idiots know all the dangers & symptoms of mercury toxicity when it comes from an alternative health product but not when it comes from dental amalgam……lies and politics anyone?

– – – – – – — –

http://healthandfitness.sympatico.ca/news/natural_health_product_recalled_excess_mercury/a9af5b6b

The Canadian Press

OTTAWA – A natural health product is being voluntarily recalled after it was found to contain an excessive amount of mercury, Health Canada said Thursday.

Bi Yan Pian (NPN# 80023876), a Chinese medicine authorized for sale as a natural health product by Health Canada, was available for purchase at stores across Canada and via the Internet.

The sample tested contained mercury at a level of 2.43 micrograms per kilogram body weight per day, an amount nearly 10 times higher than the daily maximum limit set by Health Canada for natural health products, the agency said.

Ingesting excessive amounts of mercury poses serious health risks because it may accumulate in the body’s vital organs. The risk increases with the amount and length of time the mercury is ingested. Children are most susceptible.

Symptoms of short-term exposure to high levels of mercury may include nausea, abdominal pain, vomiting, muscle cramps, diarrhea, numbness or “pins and needles” sensation in the hands and feet, malaise or blurred vision, heart abnormalities, anemia, liver and nervous system problems.

The toxic effects of longer-term exposure to high mercury levels include irritability, tremors, speech difficulties, loss of hearing and constriction of visual fields, memory loss, insomnia, concentration problems, and kidney and brain damage.

Consumers who have used the product and are concerned about its effects can consult a health-care practitioner. For additional information, contact Wing Quon Enterprises Ltd. of Richmond, B.C., at 1-604-273-5028.

For more information, contact Health Canada at 613-957-2991 or toll free at 1-866-225-0709.

2011-08-31 Two profs leave U of S, one a Canada research chair in water. Plus Support for inquiry into women in science at the University of Saskatchewan

 Take back the University  No Responses »
Aug 312011
 

CONTENTS

  1. AUGUST 31,  “TWO PROFS LEAVE U OF S”,  STAR PHOENIX
  2. AUGUST 30,   PRESS RELEASE, INTERNATIONALLY RECOGNIZED WATER RESEARCH CHAIR LEAVING  U OF S  (Dr. Monique Dubé)
  3. AUGUST 30,   LETTER FROM DR DUBE TO ROB NORRIS, MINISTER FOR ADVANCED EDUCATION
  4. JUNE 15,  LETTER FROM ACADEMIC WOMEN FOR JUSTICE TO MINISTER ROB NORRIS, SUPPORT FOR INQUIRY INTO WOMEN IN SCIENCE AT U OF S

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

1.   AUGUST 31,  “TWO PROFS LEAVE U OF S”,  STAR PHOENIX

Internationally Recognized Water Research Chair Leaving U of S

http://www.leaderpost.com/profs%20leave/5331203/story.html

Star Phoenix Staff August 31, 2011

A husband and wife pair of prominent academics are leaving the University of Saskatchewan.

Monique Dube, a Canada Research Chair in Aquatic Ecosystem Health Diagnosis, and Todd Pugsley, a clean energy specialist in the department of chemical engineering, are leaving the university for the private sector in Calgary as of Thursday.

Earlier this year, Pugsley was the spokesperson for a group of U of S academics that called for a major change in university governance after controversy arose over some senior-level appointments. That prompted a sparring match with the university administration.

But U of S provost Fairbairn said the issue did not come up in discussions with Dube and Pugsley over the terms of their departure. A confidentiality agreement is in place, said Fairbairn.

Pugsley was to teach two classes in the upcoming semester. Other professors will now handle those courses. Dube was to teach a restricted elective course for eight students and alternative arrangements are being made, according to the university.

Pugsley is moving to Suncor Energy Inc. while Dube has taken a position with Total E&P Canada Ltd.

© Copyright (c) The Regina Leader-Post
= = = = = = = = = = = == = =

2.   AUGUST 30,   PRESS RELEASE, INTERNATIONALLY RECOGNIZED WATER RESEARCH CHAIR LEAVING  U OF S  (Dr. Monique Dubé)

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
3.   AUGUST 30,   LETTER FROM DR DUBE TO ROB NORRIS, MINISTER FOR ADVANCED EDUCATION
Dear Minister,

As follow-up to the message below I wish to inform you that effective Sept 1, 2011 I will be leaving the University of Saskatchewan.

The attached press release summarizes the news.

My husband, Dr. Todd Pugsley in the Department of Chemical engineering is also leaving the University on this date.

This was not a decision I had expected to have to make and was not taken lightly. I leave behind approximately 30 staff and students, millions in research funding and associated deliverables, and research infrastructure.

The facts associated with my case were communicated to you previously as well as to your Deputy Minister, Clare Isman.  In a letter received from Mr. Isman on August 10, 2011 I was encouraged “to take advantage of the program and services offered by the U of S” and “the Ministry was assured that all of the policies and programs that would normally be made available to a person in my situation are being provided”.

As per the invitation in DM Isman’s letter dated August 10, 2011, and in light of my imminent departure from the U of S, I am contacting you in the hope that you personally will join me and perhaps my colleagues in a further discussion of the facts I raised with you in earlier correspondence.

I can be reached at moniquedube  at  sasktel.net for the month of Sept and Monique.dub  at  threatscanada.ca after that. My new cell number is (403) 890 7043. Please contact me  if you wish to discuss my departure within the confines of the terms of my departure.

Respectfully,

Dr. Monique Dubé

Associate Professor, Canada Research Chair in Aquatic Ecosystem Health Diagnosis University of Saskatchewan

Room 332, Kirk Hall   117 Science Place  Saskatoon, SK  S7N 5C8 CANADA

www.usask.ca/crc/profiles/dube.php

Science is for Service

You must do the things you think you cannot do. – Eleaner Roosevelt –

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

4.    JUNE 15,  LETTER FROM ACADEMIC WOMEN FOR JUSTICE TO MINISTER ROB NORRIS, SUPPORT FOR INQUIRY INTO WOMEN IN SCIENCE AT U OF S

From: agnes.whitfield  at  bell.net Sent: June-15-11 9:43 AM
To: rnorris@mla.legassembly.sk.ca; dharpauer@mla.legassembly.sk.ca; Dube, Monique
Subject: Support for inquiry into women in science at the University of Saskatchewan

The Honourable Rob Norris

Minister of Advanced Education, Employment and Immigration

Minister Responsible for Innovation, Innovation Saskatchewan, the Saskatchewan Opportunities Corporation, and the Saskatchewan Research Council

Dear Minister:
As President of Academic Women for Justice, I am writing to support Professor Monique Dubé’s request to you for an independent investigation into the climate for women in science at the University of Saskatchewan.

As Minister of Advanced Education, Employment and Immigration, Minister Responsible for Innovation, Innovation Saskatchewan, the Saskatchewan Opportunities Corporation, and the Saskatchewan Research Council, you are particularly well placed to make an important contribution to enhancing Saskatchewan’s competitiveness. Your leadership can play a key role in driving the development of cutting-edge research in Saskatchewan by fostering the kind of positive, energetic climate for research and research skills building that will attract outstanding researchers to the province and enable them to flourish.

As a Canada Research Chair in Aquatic Ecosystem Health Diagnosis, Professor Dubé has a stellar record. She has developed the Healthy River Ecosystem Assessment System (THREATS), a nationally recognized framework and related software to assess changes in the quality of the water in our rivers and the health of their fish. She has published over fifty articles on her numerous research projects. Her achievements have earned her national and international recognition, including most recently the Natural Science and Engineering Research Council’s Synergy award.
�
Dr Dubé is also committed to teaching and training young scientists, and to communicating the results of her work to the general public. Most recently, she has been honoured, as you know, by the YMCA, in recognition of her outreach activities.
�
That a scientist of Professor Dubé’s caliber should be facing the kinds of unfair and inequitable treatment she has brought to your attention is a cause for great concern. Issues such as failure to respect commitments under the Canada Research Chair Program, undue delays in the tenure process, harassment, and retaliation tactics point to the existence, at the University of Saskatchewan, of an environment that is not conducive to the support and development of cutting-edge research.

Academic Women for Justice feels strongly that the greatest synergy and scientific advancement occurs in working environments that are fair and equitable to women and men, and that issues of gender bias inevitably hinder scientific endeavor and hold back the creation of new knowledge

I would respectfully draw your attention to the comprehensive and rigorous study published in 2007 by the American Association of University Women, entitled Why So Few? Women in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics.

This report makes a number of concrete recommendations for improving the working environment for women, to the betterment of the whole scientific community. These suggestions could provide useful guidance for an independent inquiry into the environment for women in science at the University of Saskatchewan.

It is our opinion that a forward-looking inquiry of this kind would contribute substantially to improving not only the climate at the University of Saskatchewan for outstanding women scientists such as Professor Dubé, but also the performance of the university as a leader and innovator.

I do not know if you are aware that at present, the University of Saskatchewan houses only 24 research chairs, a mere 1,333% of Canadian Research Chairs, based on statistics on Tri-Council funded Research Chairs in Canada compiled by Professor Nadia Ghazzali, NSERC Industrial Alliance Chair on Women in science and engineering at Laval University, and Nicole Morin-Rivest.

In terms of gender balance, the University of Saskatchewan does slightly better than the unsatisfactory national average, when all research chairs are taken into account, with 29.17% of chairs being held by women, compared to 25.17% across Canada.

However, the distribution of these chairs at the University of Saskatchewan offers a different picture. In the category of NSERC funded Chairs, which applies to Professor Dubé’s chair, the University of Saskatchewan is well below the national average, with women only holding 20 % of these chairs. More significantly, women hold only a scant 7.1% of the most senior, or Tier I Chairs.

In this quantitative context, the absence at the University of Saskatchewan of equitable and effective structures to deal with workplace tensions related to gender bias and chilly climate for women in science at the University is another compelling reason for an independent inquiry with a broad mandate.
�
As President of Academic Women for Justice, I will also be writing shortly to the federal minister responsible for the Research Chair Program to express our concern about the serious issues that Professor Dubé has raised.
�
We will recommend that the University of Saskatchewan be considered ineligible for further funding through the Canada Research Chairs Program until an independent, arms-length inquiry has been carried out into the research climate at the University of Saskatchewan and corrective measures have been taken.�
�
Yours sincerely,

Agnes Whitfield, Ph.D.
President/Présidente,
Academic Women for Justice/Femmes universitaires pour la justice
Professor, Department of English/Professeure titulaire, Département d’études anglaises
York University/Université York, Toronto (Canada)

http://people.laps.yorku.ca/people.nsf/researcherprofile?readform&shortname=agnesw

http://www.academicwomenforjustice.org/

2011-08-31 Elected U of S senators take on Board chair (U of S)

 Corporatocracy or Democracy or Administrative State or WHAT?, Nuclear, Take back the University  No Responses »
Aug 312011
 

http://www.thesheaf.com/news/2011/08/31/elected-u-of-s-senators-take-on-board-chair/

by on August 31, 2011 in News

Nancy Hopkins speaks at the Board of Governors meeting at the University of Saskatchewan on Friday, March 4, 2011.

A small group of University of Saskatchewan senators are troubled by the growing influence of corporations on campus and want the chair of the Board of Governors to resign.

 The senators argue that Nancy Hopkins’ role as chair of the U of S Board of Governors generates a conflict of interest due to her longstanding involvement with uranium mining giant Cameco Corp.

Hopkins has been a prominent player in Cameco’s boardroom since 1992. According to Forbes Magazine, Hopkins received roughly $175,000 in compensation for work as a Cameco director in 2009, and as of this year, her estimated stake in the company is just over $1 million.

In April, lawyer and elected U of S senator Stefania Fortugno wrote to the university’s top brass detailing Hopkins’ apparent conflict of interest.

Fortugno cited Hopkins’ pecuniary interests with Cameco, the appointments of high-ranking nuclear physicists and the naming of the Cameco Skywalk at Royal University Hospital, and Cameco Plaza in front of the Administration Building.

Further, she points to the allocation of $30 million for a nuclear research centre while language programs are cut and the sociology department is underfunded, leaving some students unable to graduate on schedule.

“The Board of Governors can affect every single aspect of the university’s existence. By virtue of the presence of a Cameco Board member on the Board of Governors, the nuclear industry has undue influence over every aspect and key decision affecting the University of Saskatchewan,” the letter read.

As the U of S ramps up its focus on nuclear research, Fortugno would like to see major decisions done by an objective board, rather than individuals who are tied to industry.

Fortugno ended the letter by calling on Hopkins to step down.

Another elected U of S senator, Mary Jean Hande, has also voiced concerns about Hopkins’ perceived conflict of interest. Above all, Hande was outraged that Hopkins is head of the committee designated to select the next U of S president.

“I was actually completely shocked when I found out about this at one of the senate meetings, and I was shocked that nothing was being done,” said Hande. “It was quite an eye-opener, especially as somebody who is fairly new to the senate. I felt compelled to say something.”

With Peter MacKinnon’s tenure as president set to wrap up June 2012, it is rumored that both U of S vice-president of finance and resources Richard Florizone and former Edwards School of Business dean Grant Isaac are two possible successors.

Both are affiliated with the nuclear industry. Florizone holds a PhD in nuclear physics. Isaac is senior vice-president and chief financial officer of Cameco.

Senators Fortugno and Hande insisted that Hopkins should not have influence over the selection of the next president, given her relationship with the nuclear industry and the candidates.

Hopkins has labelled the allegations “absurd,” and assured that no academic appointments or allocations of funds have been affected by her association with Cameco.

She brought up the successful history of nuclear research at the U of S, noting that in the 1960s, the university was at the forefront of nuclear science in Canada with the Saskatchewan Accelerator Lab.

“Saskatchewan is endowed with some of the very best uranium resources in the world. So from the province’s point of view, it is natural to be interested in [funding] that,” said Hopkins.

President Peter MacKinnon is standing behind Hopkins, and says the conflict of interest accusations are groundless and undermine the university.

“If they had the consideration to ask other members of the board or the university administration they would have learned that board chair Hopkins is an outstanding authority on good governance, an excellent board leader and a devoted servant of the best interests of the University of Saskatchewan and all those it serves,” MacKinnon said via email.

U of S Students’ Union president Scott Hitchings, who also sits on the Presidential Selection Committee, referred to the university’s strict conflict of interest policy and said he is confident that if Hopkins were using her role as board chair to advance personal goals, the repercussions would be swift.

“The claim that she, as chair of the Board of Governors, can make the university a patsy of Cameco undermines the powers of the board,” said Hitchings. “She is simply the chair of a board of individuals, all of whom make decisions together for the betterment of the university.”

The senators do, however, feel their campaign is building momentum, and have established a sort of political action committee — University of Saskatchewan Senators Working to Revive Democracy, or USSWORD.

According to their website, USSWORD is deeply concerned about the corporatization of the U of S, and is coming together to try and curb the trend.

Hande stresses the most critical aspect of a university is the independent, publicly-funded research and teaching done there.

“Unfortunately, this distinction between public and private is becoming increasingly blurry at the University of Saskatchewan,” said Hande.

Are StatsCan “surveys” mandatory?

 Lockheed Martin, War Economy (includes Cdn Census & Trials)  145 Responses »
Aug 312011
 
No, Statistics Canada “surveys” are not mandatory.    The law is clear, scroll down to  THE SHORT OF IT ON “SURVEYS”. 

ASIDE  (Most of you know this and can skip):

“StatsCan” is Statistics Canada.  In the U.S. that function of government is known as the Census Bureau.

The questions about StatsCan Surveys (and censuses) are made worse by the involvement at StatsCan of the American military-industrial-surveillance complex represented by Lockheed Martin Corporation.

Lockheed Martin does intelligence contract work for the NSA (National Security Agency) of the United States “Defence” Dept, more accurately a War Dept.  International surveillance is among Lockheed Martin’s specialties, along with “lobbying” (crossing palms with silver) and disdain for the Rule of Law.  Lockheed Martin played an important role in the decision by the U.S. to start the illegal Iraq War and profited mightily by that decision.  It (Lockheed Martin) is symbolic of everything that is not Canadian.

(More accurately we Canadians like to identify with a Myth of Canada.  Lockheed Martin is symbolic of everything that is not that Myth.)

Detailed files on citizens (the data base at StatsCan) is a goal of every imperialist, corporatist, police state – – past and present.   Canadians have the Charter Right to Privacy of Personal Information for good reason.   The Right is ours, only insofar as we are willing to be aware and to defend it.

But hey!   You don’t have to even think about American military and surveillance intrusions into Canada.   You need only know that Surveys are voluntary under Canadian Law, and that we do have an eloquently stated Charter Right to Privacy of Personal Information. 

UPDATE:  Input from Steve enabled the construction of a Timeline.    2016-07-01   According to StatsCan Website:  Surveys are Mandatory, then Voluntary, then Mandatory.   

Excerpt:

When a citizen advised StatsCan of legal action against them for harassment over a Survey,  StatsCan sent a letter to the citizen to say that Surveys are voluntary.  The letter had the effect of bringing a halt to the legal action.   In that time period, Steve read on the StatsCan website that “all surveys are voluntary”.  

But the page, perhaps as late as June 2nd (“Date modified”) was changed back to say that the specified surveys are mandatory   (which they are not under the law, the Statistics Act.)

The posting   StatsCan Website: Surveys are Mandatory, then Voluntary, then Mandatory  (July 2016) contains:

  • the information on the Statistics Act below, plus
  • minor arguments I had not bothered to address in the past.

– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –

Before addressing SURVEYS,

Is the CENSUS mandatory?  . . .  yes, IF it does not infringe on citizens’ Charter Right to Privacy of Personal Information  – –  see

And note:

The participation and questions of many concerned citizens over more than 15 years (since 2003) has generated comprehensive documentation to explain the Laws, the difference between censuses and surveys, the collaboration between countries, the security of data bases,  profiles on Lockheed Martin Corporation,  questions of ethics and the responsibilities of citizens in a democracy,  the use of census data bases in Nazi Europe and in the USA to round up “enemies”,  the role of forgetfulness and ignorance, the use of propaganda by the Government, attempts to explain how and why academics and others rationalize away important Charter Rights and abdicate the ethical, . . .   Questions and answers – – the experiences of many people  are found in “Comments” on different postings.  If you have questions feel free to use the “Comments” to ask them.

 

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

THE SHORT OF IT ON “SURVEYS”

 

StatsCan is saying that these words from the Statistics Act (Section 8, Voluntary Surveys)

where such information is requested (answers to questions on the survey) section 31 does not apply in respect of a refusal or neglect to furnish the information.

Mean

you have to fill in the survey and if you don’t you can be prosecuted, fined and sent to jail

(Section 31 is the sanctions, fine and jail, if you are guilty of non-compliance with a Census.  Censuses are once every 5 years; surveys are being done all the time.)

That is a ludicrous interpretation of the words. It is simply not what they say.

Section 8, “Voluntary Surveys”,  says:

where “such information” – – i.e. a survey – – is requested THE SANCTIONS DO NOT APPLY.

If the sanctions do not apply, surveys are voluntary. Which is ALSO what the HEADING of Section 8 is about.

StatsCan is out-to-lunch. Their interpretation is self-serving.

– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –

Closely Related to the issue of the law on Surveys is the Charter Right to Privacy of Personal Information.  That Law is addressed separately, see:  2010-12-23 Charter of Rights and Freedoms, Section 8 Privacy – Case Law: The Queen Vs Plant protects a “biographical core of personal information” from the state. Oakes Test to override.

Acceptance of StatsCan’s position is dangerous when Lockheed Martin Corp (American surveillance) is involved. The data base on Canadians at StatsCan is relentlessly growing. We have a Charter Right to Privacy of personal information. Anyone who believes that their personal information is secure in the StatsCan data base is extremely gullible or ill-informed.  Edward Snowden and Ladar Levison remove any doubt.  (More information on Lockheed Martin’s role and connections below.)

 

NEWSPEAK:   JoAnne wrote down the wording in the StatsCan brochure that says “it is the law.  It is mandatory. You have to supply the information”.  (Now moved to the comprehensive argument found in  2016-07-01  StatsCan Website: Surveys are Mandatory then Voluntary then Mandatory.

The StatsCan brochure is propaganda, for us and for its workers.  The Orwellian word for it is “newspeak”  (new speak).  People come to believe lies, if they are repeated frequently.

So we just keep repeating and spreading the truth.

– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –

UPDATE SEPT 2015:   See also  Advocating for detailed files on citizens  (very troubling that any educated person in a democracy would advocate in support of comprehensive files on citizens; that is what they are doing).  So-called Uneducated people would know not to do it.)

UPDATE MARCH 2016:  2016-03-18   Does Lockheed Martin Corp have a role in the 2016 Census?   This is an important posting that spells out the Five Eyes (FVEY) – the U.S., U.K., Australia, New Zealand, Canada plus Lockheed Martin collaboration on censuses.  Compatible data bases between nations enhances surveillance capability.

UPDATE JUNE 2016:  I happened on a Reddit exchange re harassment by StatsCan, from end of 2015.  A person tells that StatsCan did acknowledge that surveys are voluntary.   See  StatsCan Surveys: Has anyone successfully sued StatsCan for harassment?   from exchange on Reddit

I ended up contacting a lawyer and advised Stats Can that we were seeking legal action and Stats Can sent us a letter a couple of weeks later confirming that the Labour Force Survey is voluntary and have since stopped harassing us on the phone.  Which seems to have resolved the problem for us, at least.

UPDATE JUNE 2016:     2016-06-29   Democracy, the Rule of Law. Victory over StatsCan surveys?   Celebration of Canada Day, includes info from StatsCan website – –  seems that Canadians DID win the battle to make StatsCan observe the Rule of Law in its relationships with Citizens!  Wow!

UPDATE JULY 1:   BUT THEN StatsCan, cunning devils – –  legal action against them for harassment over surveys was halted by their letter saying that the survey was indeed voluntary (the Reddit Exchange).  They changed their website to say “all surveys are voluntary”,  waited a few months.   Then changed the website back to say that some specified surveys are mandatory,  see   2016-07-01  StatsCan Website: Surveys are Mandatory then Voluntary then Mandatory.    The posting includes the most recent, comprehensive argument:  under the Law, surveys are voluntary.

UPDATE NOVEMBER 19, 2018    “Re-spendable revenue”

I could not understand WHY StatsCan would alienate Canadians the way it has been doing – –  lying, harassing, always demanding MORE – MORE data, personal data.  

There is information in this posting – – not reflected in the title – –  that provides an “aha!” moment:  StatsCan is in the Business of selling data.  They made more than 100 million dollars in 2017.

Statistics Canada kept Trudeau cabinet, privacy commissioner in the dark about controversial bank data harvest plan, Global News

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

ASIDE   July 2012:  I sent a complaint to the Federal Privacy Commissioner, StatsCan is using intimidation and a lie to force citizens to give up their charter right to privacy of personal information.  See  2012-07-13  StatsCan Surveys, Complaint to the Privacy Commissioner

Six years later,

2018-11-16   the BLIND SPOT in Privacy Commissioner’s investigation of StatsCan (getting personal data from the private sector)

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

StatsCan “surveys” (in contrast to “censuses”)  are explained in:

  1. 2010-03-31 Edmontonian Susan Crowther threatened by StatsCan.  Statistics Act, what is a census and what is a survey?  What is the law? StatsCan is operating way outside the law.
  2.  Are StatsCan surveys mandatory?  Interpretation of the Law.  
  3. 2010-07-31 Harassed by StatsCan, Margaret Fehr, Saskatoon Star Phoenix

 

A brief digression – – –

If you are not aware that Lockheed Martin Corporation (American military) is involved in the Statistics Canada data base on Canadian citizens, and that data collection on individuals is relentlessly on-going, please click on  Lockheed Martin, War Economy (also info on Census, Trial).

This is particularly relevant given the leaks by

  • Edward Snowden and
  • Julian Assange through WikiLeaks,

about American NSA  “back door” access to data bases.  Lockheed Martin does work for the NSA, as documented elsewhere on this blog.

Why would we enable NSA and FBI surveillance of ourselves?   There is a non-ending stream of revelations of the extent of American military operations.  Example :

June 24, 2015,  France summons US ambassador over ‘unacceptable’ spying

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/jun/24/francois-hollande-says-us-spying-on-french-officials-unacceptable-nsa

To me, the resistance to Lockheed Martin is guerilla warfare.

The Government was wrong to contract out to an entity with the Intentions and track record of Lockheed Martin.  Surveillance is one of the service lines sold by Lockheed Martin;  they pride themselves on their superiority in this realm.  Their role in American torture is documented on this blog, number one “contract interrogator” at American offshore prisons.   The evidence of their production of land mines and cluster munitions, both illegal.  Their role in the decision-making around the illegal war by the Americans on Iraq in 2003, the tragic outcomes of which continue to spread and worsen in the Middle East.  They routinely bilk American tax-payers.  They undermine democracy with their huge lobbying campaigns,  . . .  How the Government ever expects to gain collaboration by Canadians with such repugnance is beyond me.

The original Census contracts with Lockheed Martin were in the $50 million range (the amount and the source is in other postings).  How much we have paid in total, just for its participation at StatsCan I do not know.  We pay them millions of dollars to look after the health records of the Canadian military, a terrible conflict-of-interest.  Lockheed Martin is worming its way into our universities  – Dalhousie, Royal Military College,  University of Saskatchewan,  a collaborative aviation (drone) program in Saskatchewan involving First Nations.   And they want to saddle Canadians with billions upon billions of dollars for their F-35 stealth bombers.

Lockheed Martin is the antithesis of what it is to be Canadian.  If they were one of us they would be locked up in jail and the key thrown away.  It is wrong to collaborate with them.  It is far worse than collaborating with the mafia when viewed through the lens of actual corruption, violence, death and destruction.

BUT!  Back to question-at-hand!

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

 

ARE STATSCAN “SURVEYS” MANDATORY?   RESPONSES TO QUESTIONS I’VE BEEN ASKED   (e.g. HAS ANYONE ACTUALLY BEEN PENALIZED?)

AND STORIES FROM PEOPLE WHO HAVE BEEN SELECTED TO DO A SURVEY  

 

RE  whether surveys are in fact mandatory?:  the world is not 100% certain because – – human beings are involved!  The Statistics Act says that SURVEYS are voluntary.  The data-collection done by StatsCan in between censuses, under the Act, is defined as a survey.  So surveys are in fact voluntary.

RE  whether there are legal penalties for not taking part?:  The Statistics Act says specifically that the penalties for not complying with a census DO NOT APPLY to surveys.  So there are no legal penalties for not taking part.  The threats that Statistics Canada tells you (you can be prosecuted, sent to jail and fined) are simply intimidation tactics to try and make you take part.  You have free choice to participate or not participate in the surveys and there are no penalties depending on your choice.

RE:  has anyone been actually penalized for refusing to give in to Statcan’s pressure?    Divide this answer into two parts:

1.  SURVEYS  Many people have been harassed and threatened.  I am not aware of anyone who has been penalized (taken to court) for refusing to participate in a survey.

Which makes sense because, in order to apply penalties of any kind, StatsCan has to go through the Justice Dept (a court case).   The Justice Dept Prosecutors would know that if someone stood up to them in Court over trying to force participation in a SURVEY, the case would be thrown out of Court.  The Statistics Act says specifically that participation in “surveys” is voluntary.

2.  CENSUS  The census (once every 5 years) is different.  Yes, a miniscule number of people have actually been penalized for not supplying information.   (“Search” button, upper right hand corner of this blog for details by name of the persons named below.)

2006 CENSUS:

The only FINE I know about:   Todd Stelmach from Ontario was fined $300.  The maximum fine possible is $500.

Darek Czernewcan (Ontario) was found guilty but given a suspended sentence;  the Judge was annoyed that Prosecution Services brought Darek to trial.

I (Saskatchewan) was found guilty but given a discharge.

2011 CENSUS:

Three women selected for prosecution.  Each one of the women objected to Lockheed Martin’s involvement at Statistics Canada:

  • Audrey Tobias, 89 years old, Toronto ON
  • Janet Churnin, 79 years  old, Toronto ON  and
  • (Karen) Eve Stegenga,  a self-employed yoga instructor, 37 years old, Powell River BC.

(under the Statistics Act, censuses are mandatory, surveys are not.  We are talking here about censuses.)

2011 Census, Statute of Limitations – a two-year time limit within which charges can be brought.  The ladies received their summons to court in 2011+ 2 = 2013.  The trials were wrapped up by summer 2014.  (The next Census is in May 2016 – –  every 5 years.)

In the eyes of StatsCan and the Federal Justice Dept, these three women are obviously a threat to other people in their communities.  Hence deserving of prosecution.

Different Judges took a different view than Federal Prosecution Services.   Strictly speaking the Law may have been broken (if the Charter Right did not apply, i.e. if the information requested was not personal).    The Judgements were:

  • (Karen) Eve Stegenga received a    conditional discharge   (July 17, 2014).  She did 25 hours of community service.  She does community service all the time, it’s not really a sanction.
  • Janet Churnin received a   conditional discharge   (December 2013).  50 hours of community service.  Same status as Eve – community service is part of her life.
  • Audrey Tobias was found   not guilty   by a creative Judge  (October 2013). 

It is good to see Federal Prosecution Services putting tax money to good use.  The cost of any one of these trials is very high – preparation, consultations, judges, prosecutors, court workers, facility costs, opportunity costs (the money could have been put to better use) , , , .

As reported elsewhere on this blog,  by 2011 non-compliance with the Census was 11%  (not the 2% reported by StatsCan).  The 11% figure is based on the testimony under oath by the head of the Census operations at the trial of Audrey Tobias.

Hopefully, after the Stegenga,  last case arising out of the 2011 Census, the Justice Dept “gets it”:  the collective conscience of Canadians is strong.  The Justice Dept and StatsCan are not going to obtain compliance by using the threat of prosecution.  (Acknowledge:  not all the non-compliance is because of Lockheed Martin’s involvement.)

Prosecution Services wanted a $250.00 fine in Eve’s case, plus community service and probation.

The intent was deterrence for other Canadians.  It seems to me to be a backward argument.  They will get higher rates of compliance, not through coercion but by getting rid of the cause of the conscientious objection:  Lockheed Martin.   (They might also try respect for the Rule of Law – – Charter Right to Privacy of Personal Information, and Oakes Test has to be argued in Court and passed if the Govt wants to override the Charter Right.)

Anyhow, the Judges are not upholding the lordly status of StatsCan and Federal Prosecution Services.  Statscan’s batting average, based on court conviction with a fine is pretty abysmal (a fine in ONE case, Todd Stelmach.  Todd’s case, Kingston ON, received very good coverage by local media.  I interpreted the coverage as supportive of Todd, not of StatsCan and Lockheed Martin).

you’d think StatsCan and  Prosecution Services (Federal)  might get embarrassed and stop prosecuting Census non-compliance.

WHAT ARE THE CHANCES THAT A NON-COMPLIER WILL BE PROSECUTED?   . . . a  0.004 % chance

Elsewhere on this blog in discussions about the CENSUS, and what people might expect if they do not comply, I calculated the chances of any one person being prosecuted, based on information given by StatsCan Director of Censuses, Yves Beland,  under oath at the trial of Audrey Tobias:

1.6 million did not comply  out of 14.6 million households

(Aside:  non-compliance with the Census had grown to 11% by the 2011 Census;  StatsCan reported this (1.6 million out of 14.6 million)  as 2% non-compliance.)

After each Census,  it has been the practice of StatsCan and the Federal Justice Dept to select approximately 65 cases for prosecution.

The individual’s chance of being selected for prosecution is 65 out of 1.6 million non-compliers,  much less than a 1% chance  (a 0.004 % chance).

Regarding JAIL – – I have been told, but have no first-hand corroboration, that in years previous a farmer from near Prince Albert, SK was put in jail overnight for refusal to supply information.  Otherwise, I am not aware of anyone who might have been sentenced to, or gone to jail because of charges under the Statistics Act.

Do they (StatsCan and the Justice Department) THREATEN people with jail? …. absolutely, yes they do and repeatedly.   I can personally attest to that;  and the stories from many Canadians backup my experience.

Clearly “the law” is being used in this instance as a tool of coercion.

“Give us your personal information  . . . or else!”  

Be damned the Charter Right to Privacy of Personal Information.

“In fostering the underlying values of dignity, integrity and autonomy, it is fitting that s. 8 of the Charter should seek to protect a biographical core of personal information which individuals in a free and democratic society would wish to maintain and control from dissemination to the state.”

And be damned the Rule of Law.  No matter that it is fundamental to Democracy.

REPEAT:   In the case of SURVEYS

as far as I am aware, after working on the issue since 2003 (well over a decade) with a network of people and having been myself on Trial over the Census:

no one has been prosecuted for failure to provide information for a Survey,

which would be because the Law says that

the sanctions for census non-compliance do not apply in the case of Surveys.  Surveys are therefore voluntary. 

RE  whether i have to partake or not?

SURVEY:   The Statistics Act is clear,  you do not have to take part in a StatsCan survey.

CENSUS:  From my perspective the Charter of Rights & Freedom is clear: the Government cannot force citizens to supply information that is part of a “biographical core of personal information”.  (This applies to both censuses and to surveys.)

(Note:  I was prosecuted for non-compliance with the 2006 CENSUS.  My objection was actually to StatsCan/Public Works’ contracts with Lockheed Martin.  When I was charged under the Statistics Act, the best defence was the Charter Right to Privacy of Personal Information.   The “census long form” had 50+ questions, many of them very personal.  You just do not allow Governments to build detailed files on citizens, not if you know anything about the running of a police state.  And not if you understand WHY we have the Charter Right.)

But, as I say, we are dealing with human beings.  The Courts in Saskatchewan held that it is unreasonable to expect privacy if the demand for personal information comes from StatsCan.

October 2013:  The Supreme Court of Canada decided not to hear an appeal of the decision of the Saskatchewan Court of Appeal.  The Sask Appeal Court upheld the decisions of the lower courts in Saskatchewan  (in relation to the 2006 census long form  I was found “guilty” but given a discharge.)

StatsCan continues to tell people that they have to hand over all the information requested in a Survey, because “It is the Law.”.  They will be prosecuted if they don’t.  That is not true.

I believe we have to strenuously defend Charter Rights.  It is a low point, when, in the Province of Saskatchewan the Justices rationalized away the Charter Right to Privacy of Personal Information.  Refer also to (brief explanation):  The Oakes Test to over-ride Charter Rights.  How Prosecutors get around it.

 

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

 

ARE STATSCAN “SURVEYS” MANDATORY?   STORIES FROM THE TRENCHES

The “Comments” below are valuable additions to the discussion.

In addition to the Comments posted on this page,  there are more at Don’t know what to do about the census?  What’s happening to other people?  some actual questions and answers might be helpful.   The overflow is at:   2011-07-13.   Not everything is posted, there have been too many.

From Doug:   I think your lawyer is trying to say that the Minister may authorize the survey to be voluntary, and I believe Parliament’s intent was to state the Minister may authorize the survey itself, not that it be voluntary. I believe the Minister is authorizing the OBTAINING OF INFORMATION, not the VOLUNTARINESS of it.

From Angela:   Stats Can’s website describes the Labour Force Survey as “mandatory”, which does seem to be a contravention of the Act — unless they have the power to re-define “voluntary” surveys as mandatory, at their leisure. . .

From Patti:  I understand it as the labour survey is not a mandatory thing, even though they want to treat citizens as if it is.

 

REMINDER:   what is the actual law regarding  Are StatsCan “surveys” mandatory?

the law, as written in the Statistics Act and according to Charter Rights?

Note that (the experience of my trial) Charter Rights are extremely vulnerable:

The Oakes Test to over-ride Charter Rights.  How Prosecutors get around it.

 

 

 

2011-08-26 Brendan Cross, controversial candidate for the Green Party of Saskatchewan

 Green Party  1 Response »
Aug 302011
 

STORY PUBLISHED IN LEADER POST:  http://www.leaderpost.com/health/Greens+look+past+record/5309578/story.html

Greens look past record

 By Angela Hall, Leader-Post August 26, 2011   

A Regina man with several criminal convictions – including charges related to an incident in which he disrobed and entered the mayor’s office – plans to seek a seat for the Green Party in the upcoming provincial election.

Brendan Cross is listed as the prospective candidate for the Regina Rosemont constituency on the party’s website, although his candidacy won’t be official until after a review period that allows Green members to provide feedback.

However, the party’s candidate recruitment coordinator Sandra Finley, an acquaintance of Cross for several years, said she sought him out to run and believes he has come through “extremely difficult times” as a healthier and wiser person. His experience with bipolar disorder also helps him be a voice for others who have had forms of mental illness, she said.

 “What I have found in the past is that he is very thoughtful. He is intelligent and he brings a perspective to any political party that is actually very valuable,” Finley said, adding the decision to potentially have him on the ballot has not been taken lightly.

 In a letter to the Leader-Post, Cross noted his “checkered past” but also said he has thoughts and ideas that are worthy of being heard. He also cited his prior political experience, which includes serving as leader of what was the First Nations Party of Saskatchewan.

 In an interview Thursday, the 35-year-old said his past legal issues “always hang over me” but believes it’s no reason not to enter the political fray.

 “I struggle on a daily basis with bipolar disorder and other psychiatric issues but I don’t want that to hold me back. I don’t want to be stagnant in leading a valuable life and moving forward with goals.” 

Cross said while it’s well known that he suffers from bipolar disorder he would like it to be better known that he is “antiwar, pro-union, against nuclear waste, and for saving our planet and all people who live in it.”

 He also touts the Green Party as encouraging greater participation of people with mental issues in the drafting of policies that will affect their lives. 

Cross made headlines following a series of events in March 2010. Court heard during sentencing proceedings that Cross entered the Cathedral-area home of a young Regina mother dressed only in socks and a T-shirt. Cross ended up in City Hall, where he took an elevator to the 15th floor and proceeded to the mayor’s office before he was arrested.

After spending nearly six months in jail, he received a sentence of time served for charges that included unlawfully being in a dwelling house, committing an indecent act, assault, and threatening.

Cross also has previous convictions related to two incidents of indecent exposure in 1997, committing an indecent act in 2001, and a mischief charge in 2004 after being caught looking down into a women’s washroom stall at a movie theatre as an 11-year-old was using the facilities.

Asked about the prior charges related to exhibitionist behaviour, Finley referenced comments Cross has made in the past about being delusional and the role that it played.

“I don’t think that exhibitionism is a fair description. I don’t think that’s that what it was at all. I think it was a person who was mentally ill at the time and was deluded and that delusion was reality for him. It’s unfortunate and he can’t take it back,” Finley said.

Green Party Leader Larissa Shasko said all Green Party candidates must agree to the party’s guiding principles, which speak to the expectations of members’ behaviour and the values and belief system of the party.

“I think that it would speak poorly of us to not give somebody a second chance, but there are expectations and responsibilities and guiding principles,” Shasko said.

Cross has agreed to those principles and impressed those who have talked to him in the screening process so far, Shasko said.

“I try not to look back to people’s past any more than is necessary in order to allow them to move on,” she added.

The Regina Rosemont seat is currently held by the NDP’s Trent Wotherspoon, who is seeking re-election. Tony Fiacco, brother of Mayor Pat Fiacco, is running in the constituency for the Saskatchewan Party.

 ahall@leaderpost.com

 © Copyright (c) The Regina Leader-Post 

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

Hi Sandra, 

I read today that Mr. Cross is a candidate in Regina for the GPS, and I was startled. I’ve met him a couple times prior to his Mayor’s office incident, and unless he’s got a much better handle on his mental illness now, I’d want you to know that you’ve possibly made a mistake. If your strategy is to acquire media attention, mission accomplished, but it would be nice to get coverage for positive reasons over looming problems. If this is a decision that was made because he’s a controversial choice and would garner media attention whether he stays well or gets ill again, then it borders on exploitation of Mr. Cross who was (and possibly still is, for all I know) very ill. 

It gives me further pause in joining the party as a member, and certainly does make me consider if I’d want to be a candidate for the GPS any time soon. People want MLAs who are approachable, and Mr. Cross is not someone I’d approach with any problem of mine. 

= = = = = = = = = = == = = = = = = = 

Thanks for your input – – .   It warrants serious consideration because of your personal experience with Brendan. 

QUESTION:   Is it possible that your encounter with Brendan was not representative of who he is, because of the timing of your encounters? 

His candidacy definitely was not done to get media attention or to exploit Brendan. 

Perhaps I have made a mistake, I do not know.  I don’t believe so, but someone else and maybe TIME will be a better judge.

I responded to another person thus: 

Brendan has been in my email network for a number of years.  He makes infrequent, but valuable contributions to the dialogue – –  some environmental, some social, some political. He did let me know when he was going through a delusional period, the struggle and what had happened. 

There is a recording of a radio interview with him,  at the very bottom of his blog,  in which he explains things.  (In Regina I lived next door to a Judge and his family.  Their son has schizophrenia.  Delusion is real.   The person acts with the understanding that what they are doing is performed in a real world.  But it isn’t the real world from the perspective of those around them.)   Brendan is on medication.  He is living in a supportive family environment.   He has come through the fire, so to speak.

It was in response to recent, thoughtful input from him on an important issue that I thought he has a contribution to make and it would be worthwhile to discuss the possibility of candidacy.   He was interested; we were both aware of the potential problems.

(Penny and Larissa:  please correct me, if I have gotten this wrong.) 

Because Brendan is in Regina, Penny met and interviewed him. 

Skeptical at first, but she came out of the meeting supportive of him.  It then went to a group of the active Regina Greens.   Brendan came to their meeting, was met, etc.   In the end it was agreed that he would be supported.  Some reservations, of course.  But in general, the decision was to support his candidacy.

In response to your question,  I cannot say for sure if the entire Executive discussed Brendan’s candidacy. 

The media interviews I have done today have been positive (wait until I see what they edit it down to!  Except that I don’t go back to watch) .

In a lengthy interview for radio I spoke along these lines:  

People are born with gifts that are innate to them.  Sometimes their life experience and our society make it difficult for those god-given gifts to be developed.   I have had the luxery of growing up in a secure, loving home and supportive community.  I was able to attend University.  Not everyone has been so blessed.  Some children are significantly harmed in their early years, intentionally or unintentionally and through no choice of theirs.  It is truly the luck of the draw. 

It is up to us to find ways for people to fully develop and contribute their particular talents to our communities.   We are richer and happier if everyone, no matter their position or background, health, race, religion or gender,  has the opportunity.  They might blow the opportunity, but if they have taken control of their life and sincerely want to contribute, why would they not be given the chance to prove themselves?

From what I know about Brendan Cross, I would say that first, he was born with gifts that equip him to contribute in the political sphere.   From what I know of his life experience, I think he is uniquely equipped to represent a segment of our society that is poorly understood and represented.  He did not choose the training he received (who would?!).  But it is more valuable than anything that could be taught in a university course.   I do not think it is wise, as a society, to develop a cadre of politicians who represent the same thing because they are selected on the basis of street appeal. 

It is not an easy choice to be different.  It is not an easy choice for Brendan to face public scrutiny by running for public office.  It takes courage under the best of circumstances.  

Brendan gained the acceptance of the Green Party members in Regina, when they got to know him somewhat.  Those Greens are members of the community, the same as voters.  I see no reason why the voters would react differently.  There are those who will give him a chance. 

People who do not develop their talents, for whatever internal or external reasons, become non-productive members of our society, often frustrated, sometimes angry.   We can each try to know each other better,  to discover the talents of the other.  Sometimes we can open small channels that will allow  – – that is all it has to be  – – ALLOW another to overcome a hand that was dealt to them at birth.   

It is very rewarding for everyone  –  the individual, supporters, and the community  – –  when the door is open to receive the talents.  Even if there is some stumbling on the way to the door!

In another interview I was asked if I wasn’t afraid that Brendan would run naked again.   I try not to make decisions out of fear.  (I am frankly more afraid, and the consequences are much more severe,  that elected officials are representing corporate interests and not the public interest.) 

I was asked by the media what Brendan would bring to the table?   I know him from his engagement in community issues.  He is thoughtful, intelligent,   – –  a risk. Yes.  But one worth taking, I think. 

There are good points to be made regarding representative democracy, the wisdom and contributions that can be made from personal experience with something like mental illness, etc etc.   The fact that  representative democracy  has become a matter of cloned candidates who represent the same thing.  Monoculture really,  even if skin colour is different.  Real diversity is squelched;  thou shall not speak if thou art a candidate or an elected member.   Only “Our Leaders” are to be trusted with “the message”.

Let me end with the message on my answering machine from John Keen:  The Green Party has a candidate with nothing to hide!   (Sorry   I couldn’tresist some levity!)

Sandra

 —– Original Message —–

Hi Sandra,

Thank you for the thoughtful response. I understand the need to have politicians with different backgrounds (not all lawyers). My point was that after a person comes into a life of crime, intentionally or through illness, they’d have to do community service that they are recognized for prior to entering public life successfully. Serge LeClerc managed to win a seat for the Sask Party thanks to his positive work with children for years, and exposure on the radio.

Brendan doesn’t have this sort of background after his extremely negative press coverage. The media in this province is not kind, they are not going to take the Greens very seriously if they go out on limbs for people who should be very welcome to join campaigns as support and advisers, but are ill suited to be candidates at this point.

Even though it may not be the case, this makes it appear as if the Greens are very desperate for candidates, and have low standards.

First impressions are important, and many people have not heard about the Green Party of Saskatchewan, but they may now hear of the party because of this questionable uncontested candidate selection. Brendan ruined his first impression chances with me, and he’s going to have to meet a lot of people in any riding he’s running in, and change their pre-conceptions, in order to not hurt the party’s vote count.  

Actual nomination meetings would be nice, so the media has something else to cover than one controversial nominee who could still presumably be defeated in a nomination race. Imagine how you could turn this story around if you found someone as well qualified as Brendan, with less experience scaring people, and have them contest his nomination. If Brendan wins the nomination, that’s an interesting story for the media to cover and for people to mull over.  

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

FROM PENNY TO CANDIDATES

Good morning everyone,

The media is talking about Brendan after noticing he put his name forward as a candiate for Regina Rosemont.  Everyone that met Brendan finds him to be a very genuine individual.  He is a well qualified candidate with a history of mental illness.  He was 20 years old when he started the First Nations Party of Saskatchewan and his natural ability with politics is evident when you have a conversation with him.  He is fine while on his medication and has changed his lifestyle to ensure his good health continues.

-I think I can speak for most people in Regina who have been working with him over the past couple of weeks when I say we stand by his candidacy.

What they fail to report about the city hall incident was that one winter day he became paranoid, ran out of his home without his pants.  Finding himself locked out of his apartment and no one coming to his aid, he encountered agression rather than compassion or assistance when he entered a familiar building-Regina City Hall. Then it was off to jail rather than a hospital.

Do we want to get this information out to our membership or shall we let them contact us?  The Leader Post article gives a good account of the issues over Brendan’s past.  Angela Hall has captured the seriousness of the events but also the controversy around mental illness.

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

Subject: Re: Brendan Cross 

Murray Mandryk and I don’t always come to the same conclusion, so this should worry you that he’s said the same things as I have, independently.

http://www.leaderpost.com/news/Topp/5315453/story.html

A new man at the Topp?

By Murray Mandryk, The Leader-Post August 27, 2011  

For all the vigorous claims from political activists that parties are strictly defined by their policies, parties are more often defined by the people they choose to represent them.

This is especially evident in their choice of leaders.

Take this province’s Saskatchewan Party and NDP. They have undergone relatively minor policy tweaking in the past decade, but radical transformations in their electoral prospects largely resulting from the respective leaders they have chosen. This demonstrates the profound effect a leader has on a party. But even a single candidate can sometimes have a serious impact.

The local Green Party, for example, is now seriously considering running Brendan Cross in Regina Rosemont. His baggage includes a bipolar disorder that’s contributed to criminal convictions for indecent exposure, committing an indecent act, unlawfully being in a dwelling house, assault, threatening and, most recently, a March 2010 incident in which he ran, pant-less, through downtown Regina into City Hall and up to Mayor Pat Fiacco’s office. Putting it mildly, this is not exactly your ideal political resume. And actively seeking out Cross as a candidate is just a very bad idea.

While Cross has dabbled in politics, he has no meaningful political experience. If this is somehow a Green Party statement about how those with mental illness can contribute to politics, the kinder thing to do would be to allow Cross (who, according to a 2004 court appearance, is easily destabilized by stress) to privately work through his own issues before burdening him with the stress of public life.

By running or even recruiting Cross now – especially in a seat like Regina Rosemont that should be relatively fertile ground for them – the Greens are sending out a message that will make it hard for many voters to take them seriously.

If this is the impact a single candidate can have on a peripheral provincial political party struggling for third-party status, imagine the magnitude of the decision facing federal New Democrats in finding just the right replacement for Jack Layton. And what’s now intriguing is the serious consideration being given to a big-time, backroom strategist – one-time Roy Romanow senior adviser Brian Topp.

Topp was recruited to Saskatchewan for his formidable political talents in 1993, though his actual track record in this province wasn’t always impressive. Arriving on executive council shortly before the NDP’s 1995 re-election, Topp played a key role in the nearly fatal 1999 campaign, where the NDP could only muster a coalition government with the Liberals and actually received fewer votes than the upstart, two-year-old Sask. Party. For this, he paid a political price and was gone in December 1999, well before Romanow stepped down. 

Of course, since that time Topp has put together a considerably more formidable political resume and even a bit of a national public profile as director of the entertainment union ACTRA, a Globe and Mail columnist and author of a couple of political books. He directed Layton’s 2006 and 2008 campaigns and was recently appointed federal NDP president. Unquestionably, he’s respected as a brilliant political strategist – one capable of matching both wits and nasty blows with Conservative Prime Minister Ste-phen Harper. Notwithstanding that Topp has never run for public office or been elected, many in the NDP circle believe that’s enough to qualify the bilingual, Quebec-born Topp to simply step in where Layton left off.

Unfortunately, it doesn’t quite work that way. The problem here is that Topp is not really all that much like Layton at all. If it’s unkind to say that Topp wasn’t exactly the warmest, most personable guy during his tenure in Saskatchewan, it would also be true. While the bright proprietor of a rather acerbic wit, Topp was also known to be a little cold and condescending.

Bluntly put, Topp’s personality would seem to be the antithesis of Smilin’ Jack’s natural warmth that so drove the NDP popularity last spring – a reminder of how different the skill set is between a backroom player and those expected to front the image of the party. And one wonders if the NDP backroom strategists now promoting Topp’s leadership candidacy have already forgotten what got them there.

After all, a party is most often defined by the people who represent it.

 Mandryk is the political columnist for the Leader-Post. 

© Copyright (c) The Regina Leader-Post

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

I phoned Murray Mandryk.  He was very agreeable to meeting (Aug 31) .  I expect we will all come away wiser!

Sandra

————————————————–

From: Penny    Subject: Re: Brendan Cross 

Good morning —    Thank you for your comments and insight about Brendan Cross.

I think you will be relieved by another conversation with him.  He has been well received by the other candidates running in Regina and has proven himself to be an asset to the campaign planning. 

There are a couple opportunities for a visit in the near future  . . .  I hope you can join us!  Penny 

= = == = = ==

2011-08-26 On Campus News: Momentum builds for nuclear centre

 Corporatocracy or Democracy or Administrative State or WHAT?, Nuclear, Take back the University  No Responses »
Aug 262011
 

Following the provincial funding announcement in March, the real work of establishing a centre for nuclear innovation at the U of S is underway, beginning with the recent appointment of an interim director.

John Root’s first task was to shape the centre’s mandate in consultation with university and government stakeholders.

He is now consulting with faculty and leaders from the broader community to define more clearly how this centre could contribute to research, development and training in the nuclear domain.

A detailed business plan is currently under development and will be presented to University Council and the Board of Governors this fall.

The purpose of the centre is “to place Saskatchewan among the global leaders in nuclear research, development and training,” said Root, who is on secondment from his role as director of the National Research Council’s Canadian Neutron Beam Centre at Chalk River, Ont. “We will get there  through investing in partnerships with academia and industry. These partnerships are intended to maximize social and economic benefits.”

The centre will focus in areas that have the potential to make significant contributions to nuclear knowledge, explained Root. These include: nuclear medicine, materials development, safety and practice in nuclear energy systems, and society’s knowledge and understanding of nuclear-related technology.

“We are neither pro nor anti-nuclear, but we do want to focus on the nuclear domain because it is an area where the U of S and the province have strengths that can deliver positive impacts in the province, Canada and the world,” he noted.

“Anything nuclear has social interest as a big component. So we need to engage citizens in conversations to understand risks that are associated with nuclear technologies and on how to mitigate those risks while reaping benefits for people and the environment. It sounds obvious, but knowledge reduces uncertainty and builds confidence.”

Equally important to the areas of focus are the activities taking place in those fields, he said. “We expect Saskatchewan can have worldwide influence by building on our strengths and choosing key areas to maximize our impact. The   practical outcomes of our activities will determine our success.  “There are three key activities that the centre will support: programs, projects and facilities,” he explained.

The centre will help to establish academic programs in nuclear science, technology and policy; stimulate research and development projects that engage partners; and assume esponsibility for management of selected facilities.

“With $30 million of funding from the government of Saskatchewan to support the centre for an initial seven year period, expectations are mounting,” said Root. “People will want to know if the centre was a good investment. We need to demonstrate results and benefits. There need to be discoveries, developments, and new ideas emerging from the U of S through our facilities, people and partnerships.”

The U of S pioneered the field of nuclear medicine, said Root, and was involved in other nuclear technologies from the outset. “We can build on that foundation and modernize the focus of our pioneering spirit.

This centre will put Saskatchewan among the global players in our areas of focus, helping to attract and retain highly qualified people—students, researchers and faculty—in our prairie region.”

2011-08-25 Minister Rob Norris (former U of S employee) – the Province going ahead with development of “Small nuclear reactors” (for the tar sands)

 Nuclear, Take back the University  No Responses »
Aug 252011
 

(Govt of Saskatchewan in collaboration with Govt of Canada)

The August 2011 news report below from the Minister Responsible spells out:  “funding . . .  that will facilitate and support research collaborations in . . .  small reactor design.”

 

Connect the dots:

Earlier we circulated information about “Small” nuclear reactors  – –  Hyperion in the U.S., motivated by the need for energy supply for tar sands expansion  ( 2009-11-29  Panel decision – more Govt funding for the industry. Hyperion. Small reactors. UDP. University of Saskatchewan.)

Premier Brad Wall spelt out in March 2008:

“Premier Brad Wall said Thursday he envisions an ambitious project involving the federal government, SaskPower and one of the uranium companies located in the province that would see Saskatchewan playing a lead role in the research and development of nuclear power. 

Speaking to reporters, Wall said he had a lengthy discussion with Stephen Harper when the prime minister was in Saskatchewan this week about a federal investment in the province involving the nuclear industry.

The premier said it’s linked to the Conservative government’s recent budget commitment of $300 million to the federal Crown Corporation Atomic Energy Canada Ltd., in part for its development of the next generation Canadian nuclear reactor.

“What we’ve simply said to the federal government is that if they’re looking to develop a new generation of reactor technology and are prepared to invest in that as a federal government, perhaps there is a P3 (public-private partnership) opportunity here between two levels of government. We have a Crown-owned electrical utility, the federal government and uranium companies that might be interested that are located here,” said Wall.”

It’s a concern for all Canadians because you (we) are the enablers, the funders.  We will be funding more than an “isotope” project and will continue paying in more than one way.  Do you want to do that?  Make a conscious decision because it’s critical to our longterm well-being.

– – –

Jan 5, 2009,  EXCERPT:

Hyperion Power Generation Inc. has developed a garden shed-sized nuclear reactor . . .

Hyperion, which calls its reactor as a “nuclear battery,” licensed the technology from the Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico. It plans to sell the reactor for about $30 million (U.S.) and says there’s potential to sell 4,000 of them around the world by 2025. . . .

The idea is that oil-sands developers, which rely heavily on electricity and steam to mine and upgrade bitumen, could purchase and operate their own Hyperion nuclear reactors as a way to virtually eliminate their controversial dependence on natural gas – that is, the use of a relatively “clean” fossil fuel as a way to extract and process one of the dirtiest fossil fuels.

“It was really created for the Alberta (INSERT:  and Saskatchewan) tar sands… we have strong interest there,” says Deborah Blackwell, vice-president of licensing and public affairs at Hyperion. “

= = = = = = =

SASKATCHEWAN AND HITACHI SIGN NUCLEAR R&D AGREEMENTS

http://www.gov.sk.ca/adx/aspx/adxGetMedia.aspx?mediaId=1525&PN=Shared

News Release – August 25, 2011

Innovation Minister Rob Norris today joined with Mr. Hiroto Uozumi, President of Hitachi-GE Nuclear Energy, Ltd. and Mr. Taiji Yoshida General Manger of Hitachi, Ltd. to announce $10 million in funding for two Memorandums of Understanding (MOUs) that will facilitate and support research collaborations in nuclear medicine, materials science, nuclear safety and small reactor design.

“Almost six months ago Premier Wall announced our new research centre for nuclear medicine and materials science at the University of Saskatchewan and today I’m pleased to announce a new partnership with Hitachi Ltd, Hitachi-GE Nuclear Energy, Ltd. (Hitachi-GE), GE-Hitachi Nuclear Energy Americas LLC (GEH) and Global Nuclear Fuel – Americas LLC, (GNF-A) to further establish Saskatchewan as a leader in nuclear science and medicine,” Norris said.

Innovation Saskatchewan will provide $5 million over the next five years to support R&D activities pursuant to the MOUs in collaboration with Saskatchewan-based research institutions including the University of Saskatchewan, the University of Regina, the Saskatchewan Research Council and the Canadian Light Source Synchrotron. The Hitachi Group, including its alliance with General Electric will match Saskatchewan’s contribution.

The new research partnership will leverage Hitachi’s successful development and commercialization of proton beam therapy technologies and Saskatchewan’s world class research facilities such as the Canadian Light Source Synchrotron to investigate the development of new nuclear medicines and nuclear imaging technologies.

Nuclear safety will be another major research priority as Hitachi and Innovation Saskatchewan consider research proposals pursuant to the MOUs.

Another area of interest to both Saskatchewan, Hitachi-GE, GEH and GNF-A is research into the reclamation of unused uranium fuel rods.

Under the MOUs, Innovation Saskatchewan will also work with Hitachi-GE, GEH and GNF-A on research into the design and feasibility of small reactor technologies although any decision on whether to pursue nuclear power in Saskatchewan is still many years away.

Today’s $10 million investment in nuclear R&D builds on announcements by the Governments of Canada and Saskatchewan this year to invest $30 million for the establishment of a new centre for research in nuclear medicine and materials science, $17 million for the establishment of a Centre for Innovation in Cyclotron Science, $12 million to support innovative research in the production of life saving medical isotopes and $10.1 million for the development of Saskatchewan’s first PET/CT facility for diagnosis and treatment of cancer and heart disease at the University of Saskatchewan.

-30-

For more information, contact:

Yuichi Izumisawa
Hitachi, Ltd.
Phone: 81-3-5208-9324
Email: yuichi.izumisawa.by@hitachi.com

Mickey Takeuchi
Hitachi America, Ltd.
Phone: 914-352-5800
Email: masayuki.takeuchi@hal.hitachi.com

Rebecca Rogoschewsky
Executive Council
Regina
Phone: 306-787-0980
Email: Rebecca.Rogoschewsky@gov.sk.ca

Related Documents

 Hitachi Backgrounder.pdf (23.3 KB)

http://www.gov.sk.ca/adx/aspx/adxGetMedia.aspx?mediaId=1525&PN=Shared

Backgrounder

The Government of Saskatchewan and Hitachi Ltd. has signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) to collaborate on and support nuclear research and development in areas including nuclear medicine and medical imaging.

The Government of Saskatchewan has also signed an MOU between Innovation Saskatchewan and Hitachi-General Electric Nuclear Energy Ltd (Hitachi-GE), General Electric-Hitachi Nuclear Energy Americas LLC (GEH) and Global Nuclear Fuel – Americas LLC (GNF-A) to collaborate on and support nuclear R&D in nuclear safety, materials science, nuclear fuels and feasibility of small reactor technologies.

Hitachi and Saskatchewan

Hitachi and the Province of Saskatchewan have built a strong and cooperative working relationship over 40 years in the power generation field including work on coal, hydro, natural gas and wind generation technologies. Hitachi has provided generation facilities to Saskatchewan Power Corporation (“SaskPower”). In 1988, Hitachi established Hitachi Canadian Industries Ltd. as a manufacturing base for power generation equipment in Saskatchewan province thereby deepening its relationship with SaskPower and Saskatchewan. In February 2010, SaskPower and Hitachi agreed to collaborate on the advancement and implementation of technology in the fields of low-carbon energy technologies, including Carbon Capture & Storage (CCS). In May 2010, Saskatchewan and Hitachi reached a landmark agreement with the signing of a joint declaration to work together and share information for developing energy and environmental technologies, including CCS for thermal power plants, renewable energy and smart grid technologies. Hitachi is also providing an innovative, first-of-its-kind turbine for SaskPower’s world leading Boundary Dam Integrated Carbon Capture and Storage project.

About Innovation Saskatchewan

Innovation Saskatchewan is a special operating agency established by the Government of Saskatchewan to coordinate the Province’s support for research and development and science and technology. Innovation Saskatchewan works to encourage and facilitate the development and commercialization of new ideas, products and processes with the goal of ensuring the long-term sustainable growth of an innovation-driven economy in Saskatchewan.

About Hitachi Ltd.

Hitachi, Ltd., (NYSE: HIT / TSE: 6501), headquartered in Tokyo, Japan, is a leading global electronics company with approximately 360,000 employees worldwide. Fiscal 2010 (ended March 31, 2011) consolidated revenues totaled 9,315 billion yen ($112.2 billion). Hitachi will focus more than ever on the Social Innovation Business, which includes information and telecommunication systems, power systems, environmental, industrial and transportation systems, and social and urban systems, as well as the sophisticated materials and key devices that support them. For more information on Hitachi, please visit the company’s website at http://www.hitachi.com.

About Hitachi-GE Nuclear Energy, Ltd

Hitachi-GE, a joint venture established by Hitachi, Ltd. and General Electric Company in July 2007, as one of the world’s leading comprehensive plant manufacturers, engages in the development, planning, design, manufacture, inspection, installation, pre-operation, and maintenance of nuclear reactor-related equipment and is able to execute integrated project management. Hitachi-GE has been involved with 23 reactors in Japan to date, including those currently under construction. Among them, it has participated in all of Japan’s Advanced Boiling Water Reactor (ABWR) projects-four ABWRs are already operational and three are under construction. Overseas, it has supplied major nuclear reactor equipment for the Lungmen Nuclear Power Plant in Taiwan.

About GE Hitachi Nuclear Energy

Based in Wilmington, N.C., GE Hitachi Nuclear Energy (GEH) is a world-leading provider of advanced reactors and nuclear services. Established in June 2007, GEH is a global nuclear alliance created by GE and Hitachi to serve the global nuclear industry. The nuclear alliance executes a single, strategic vision to create a broader portfolio of solutions, expanding its  capabilities for new reactor and service opportunities. The alliance offers customers around the world the technological leadership required to effectively enhance reactor performance, power output and safety.

About Global Nuclear Fuel – Americas, LLC

GNF is a joint venture of General Electric (NYSE:GE), Toshiba Corporation and Hitachi, Ltd. Global Nuclear Fuel (GNF) is a world-leading supplier of boiling water reactor fuel, including uranium dioxide and MOX fuel and fuel-related engineering services. GNF operates primarily through Global Nuclear Fuel-Americas, LLC in Wilmington, N.C., and Global Nuclear Fuel- Japan Co. Ltd. in Kurihama, Japan.

About Hitachi’s cooperative relationship with GE in the nuclear power field

Hitachi and GE established joint venture companies in 2007 to construct, maintain, and provide related services for nuclear power plants in Japan and the United States, and are proactively pursuing international business activities. The Japanese joint venture, Hitachi-GE Nuclear Energy, Ltd., is roughly 80% owned by Hitachi and 20% owned by GE, and in the United States, GE-Hitachi Nuclear Energy is 40% owned by Hitachi and 60% owned by GE. Both companies are utilizing their accumulated know-how and experience to further expand their nuclear power businesses in global markets.

= = = = = =

MORE ON SMALL NUCLEAR REACTORS:

http://forum.stopthehogs.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=759

2011-08-24 Thesis supervisor to University President’s son becomes Dean of Law, over the Search Committee’s choice.

 Take back the University  No Responses »
Aug 242011
 

Darcy writes:

So it is true:  William MacKinnon, son of the current U of S President, was supervised for his Master of Laws degree by Dr. Sanjeev Anand.  See

http://heinonline.org/HOL/LandingPage?collection=journals&handle=hein.journals/alblr45&div=7&id=&page=    (partial text from the link is copied below/S.)

Dr. Anand, as you will recall, was appointed Dean of Law at U of S earlier this year after a highly unconventional competition process.   …

(See  2011-01-21 Top U of S officials face criticism over law dean selection, four different news reports.   None of the reports mention the connection between Anand and MacKinnon.)

This all calls into question some of President MacKinnon’s decision-making practices and indicates how he is prepared at times to bend the rules to suit his purposes.  One can readily see how William MacKinnon’s academic credentials received a huge boost upon the appointment of his thesis supervisor to the prestigious position of Dean of Law at U of S.

(INSERT:  More importantly, Anand is now indebted to MacKinnon.  All the President’s Yes Men.  In MacKinnon’s case, the Dean of Law job was a springboard to the Presidency of the University.

(UPDATE  In 2013 the compensation for the President of the University of Saskatchewan is $400,000 plus bounteous perks.  See 2012-12-07 Infographic: University of Saskatchewan salaries, CBC News )

(UPDATE:  Anand was appointed a Provincial Court (Sask) Judge in Oct 2014, before completion of his term as Law School Dean which began in 2011.)

Too bad that the press did not disclose this connection to the public.

(INSERT:  Maybe the press didn’t know.)

No wonder Peter MacKinnon was so defensive when this irregular appointment received public notice.

– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –

MACKINNON / ANAND CONNECTION, PARTIAL TEXT of  http://heinonline.org/HOL/LandingPage?collection=journals&handle=hein.journals/alblr45&div=7&id=&page= :

45 Alta. L. Rev. 79 (2007-2008)

Tessling, Brown, and A.M.:  Towards a Principled Approach to Section 8; MacKinnon, William*

This article analyzes the Supreme Court of Canada’s search-and-seizure jurisprudence in anticipation of the Court’s forthcoming decisions on the admissibility of evidence obtained by police dog searches in  . . .

the bottom of the page,

*        B.A., L.L.B., L.L.M.   This article is an edited version of my Master of Laws thesis which was authored in residence at the University of Alberta.  I would like to thank my graduate supervisor, Dr. Sanjeev Anand, for his guidance during the preparation of this article.  I would also like to thank . . ,”

– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –

BACKGROUND:

January 2011 – brouhaha initiated by a downtown lawyer: Peter MacKinnon, President of the University of Saskatchewan, in concert with Brett Fairbairn, Provost of the University, over rode the choice of the Search Committee for the new Dean of Law.

Circulated in our network:  four different reports on the selection of the Dean of Law at the U of S:

(Click on)  2011-01-21 Top U of S officials face criticism over law dean selection

NOTE:

To find the material regarding the University,  go to Categories (righthand sidebar),  then to Knowledge Base.  Click on:   Take back the University.

Then scroll down: a listing of the postings related to the University comes up, with a short synopsis of each.   It includes the conflicts-of-interest at the University and the denial by Peter MacKinnon that such conflicts exist.

The full text of a posting becomes available by clicking on the title in the thumbnail sketch of the posting.

2011-08-20 Nuclear Japan: What will the energy supply be now? (New York Times)

 Nuclear  No Responses »
Aug 202011
 

“ . .  Japan was slow to develop alternative forms of energy, like solar or wind power, which account for just 1 percent of its electricity supply.” 

Why didn’t Japan develop alternative forms of energy (the need was obvious)?   

“ . . .   cumbersome regulations and government foot-dragging were holding the (alternative)industry back.  

“The cost of solar power has dropped in recent years, but government policy hasn’t caught up to that,” . . .  One roadblock for renewable power in Japan has been the inability of producers to get an adequate price for their electricity on the market, where they must compete with cheaper power from coal, natural gas and nuclear power.  

NOTE:  I strongly disagree with the phrase “cheaper power” from fossil fuels and nuclear.   They would not be cheaper if the pollution (health) and other costs – –  that are paid by the public – –  were figured in.   “Cheaper” is also a false indicator when you are talking about resources that are finite.

In Japan, same as in Canada:  large financial and political investments in the status quo creates intransigent resistance to change, no matter how obvious the need.  Decisions are made to suit financial interests, not the public, longterm interests.  AND the public is willing to let it happen.   (Although I think those days are coming to an end.  People are waking up and getting angry.) 

From Japan, made clear in the following article:   crisis eventually forces change upon us.  But when the investments have been in the declining resource sectors, with only token investment in the new and needed sectors, there is reduced capacity to respond to the crisis in a way that offers effective relief.  You dig deeper into the hell-hole, instead of climbing out.

This New York Times article does a nice job of illustrating the role of energy in the economy.  We are truly the adolescent who needs to come to terms:  there are limitations on behavior.  There are long term consequences. 

From what I see in Saskatchewan, Canadians seem determined to repeat Japan’s folly, failing to transition off  dead-end declining resources.   /Sandra

 – – – – — – – – 

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/20/business/energy-environment/quake-in-japan-is-causing-a-costly-shift-to-fossil-fuels.html

Business Day Energy & Environment

August 19, 2011

Japan Quake Is Causing Costly Shift to Fossil Fuels

By HIROKO TABUCHI

YOKOSUKA, Japan — The half-century-old, oil-fueled power generators here had been idle for more than a year when, a day after the nuclear accident in March, orders came from Tokyo Electric Power headquarters to fire them up.

“They asked me how long it would take,” said Masatake Koseki, head of the Yokosuka plant, which is 40 miles south of Tokyo and run by Tokyo Electric. “The facilities are old, so I told them six months. But they said, ‘No, you must ready them by summer to prepare for an energy shortage.’ ”

Now, at summer’s peak, Yokosuka’s two fuel-oil and two gas turbines are cranking out a total of 900,000 kilowatts of electricity — and an abundance of fumes.

The generators are helping to replace the 400 million kilowatt-hours of daily electricity production lost this summer because of the shutdown of all but 15 of Japan’s 54 nuclear reactors in the wake of the Fukushima Daiichi disaster. Across the country, dozens of other fossil-fuel plants have been fired up, and Japan is importing billions of dollars worth of liquefied natural gas, coal and oil to keep them running.

Japan, the world’s third-largest user of electricity behind China and the United States, had counted on an expansion of nuclear power to contain energy costs and greenhouse gas emissions. Instead, its nuclear program is in retreat, as the public and government officials urge a sharp reduction in the nation’s reliance on nuclear power and perhaps an end to it altogether.

As its nuclear program implodes, Japan is grappling with a jump in fuel costs, making an economic recovery from the March earthquake and tsunami all the more difficult. Annual fuel expenses could rise by more than 3 trillion yen, or about $39 billion, the government says.

The country, until recently a vocal proponent of measures to curb climate change, is also leaving a bigger carbon footprint. According to government calculations, Japan’s greenhouse gas emissions could rise by as much as 210 million metric tons, or 16 percent, by 2013 from 1990 levels if its nuclear reactors were shut permanently. Under the 1997 Kyoto Protocol, a global agreement on greenhouse gas emissions, Japan promised to reduce its emissions by 6 percent over that period.

“Can nuclear be eliminated?” asked Adam Schatzker, an energy analyst at RBC Capital Markets. “It’s possible, but very costly.”

If necessary, Japan could replace the energy capacity lost in the shutdown of its nuclear fleet by increasing the use of natural gas and coal, Mr. Schatzker said. “But even if fossil fuel facilities can make up for the loss of nuclear, it would likely take time, cost a great deal more money and pollute significantly,” he said.

For resource-poor Japan, it is an energy shift of an unprecedented scale and speed. A generation ago, the oil shock of 1973, which exposed the country’s overdependence on Middle Eastern oil, forced Japanese companies to focus on energy efficiency and prompted the government to invest heavily in nuclear power.

But as it doubled down on nuclear power plants, Japan was slow to develop alternative forms of energy, like solar or wind power, which account for just 1 percent of its electricity supply.

Prime Minister Naoto Kan has called for a gradual move away from nuclear energy, and proposed a goal of generating 20 percent of Japan’s electricity from renewable sources, including hydroelectric plants, by the early 2020s. The Parliament is debating legislation to spur that change.

A nuclear-free future could come much sooner, however. Nervous local governments have blocked the restart of reactors idled for routine inspections, which occur every 13 months. If no reactors can restart, Japan’s entire nuclear fleet, which provided 30 percent of its electricity in 2009, could be closed by spring.

The shutdowns are already causing an energy squeeze. At least three utilities have come close to full capacity during peak demand hours this summer. The government has warned that eastern Japan, including Tokyo, could face an electricity shortage of about 10 percent next summer if no nuclear plants are running.

A 10 percent shortage may not be disastrous. This summer, for example, a major energy-saving drive by households and companies drove down peak electricity demand in July by about 20 percent, to 46.3 million kilowatts, averting blackouts despite the energy shortfall, according to Tokyo Electric, the operator of the stricken Fukushima plant.

Still, “we take this situation very seriously,” Toshio Nishizawa, chief executive of Tokyo Electric, said this month. Only three of the company’s 17 nuclear reactors are running.

A protracted increase in fossil fuel costs is possible to make up for the shortfall, traders say.

Japan’s liquefied natural gas imports have jumped for three consecutive months, squeezing global supplies amid strong demand from China and other emerging economies. Imports of coal, which still accounts for 25 percent of Japan’s energy, are also rising.

Analysts at RBC Capital Markets predict that in Japan, the world’s largest importer of coal, coal-fired generation could climb as much as 20 percent, equivalent to 3 percent of global supply.

Last month, Japan’s power utilities said they would raise electricity prices in September to make up for higher fuel costs.

Some businesses worry about the impact of a long-term energy deficit.

“We could see Japanese companies start to move overseas,” Hiromasa Yonekura, chairman of Sumitomo Chemical and head of Japan’s largest business lobby, the Keidanren, told reporters last month. “A prolonged energy shortage could harm business and investment.”

Meanwhile, the sharply higher energy costs are helping to undermine Japan’s formerly rock-solid balance of trade, which swung into the red for three straight months after the earthquake as exporters struggled to restart production. The country’s trade surplus for July was down 90 percent from a year earlier, on a combination of weak exports and rising energy imports.

Elon Musk, the American entrepreneur and founder of the electric car company, Tesla Motors, was in tsunami-stricken Soma late last month to donate $250,000 to build a solar farm there. He said that he saw potential for renewable energy in Japan, but that cumbersome regulations and government foot-dragging were holding the industry back.

“The cost of solar power has dropped in recent years, but government policy hasn’t caught up to that,” Mr. Musk said in a telephone interview.

One roadblock for renewable power in Japan has been the inability of producers to get an adequate price for their electricity on the market, where they must compete with cheaper power from coal, natural gas and nuclear power.

Lawmakers are debating a law that would require utilities to buy electricity from solar, wind, geothermal, hydroelectric and other renewable power sources, even if it means paying a premium. According to Japan’s Trade Ministry, the move would raise average home electricity bills by about 200 yen (more than $2) a month.

“If we, as a society, are willing to pay more, this technology will most certainly spread,” said Norihiro Okumura, an economist with the Tokyo-based Institute of Energy Economics. “And though some in industry say this hurts competitiveness, renewable energy will create new businesses, too.”

Until then, the huge generators at the Yokosuka power plant will continue to pick up the slack, fumes notwithstanding.

“People once called this the No. 1 power plant in the Orient,” Mr. Koseki said. “We are back, doing what we can.”
 Older Entries  Newer Entries