Dear Kevin Page,

I like you. All too often bureaucrats don't get the thanks they deserve. Thanks! I'll be following your budget reports closely.

Cheers!
Karen

Oh, dear me

I truly wanted the charity piece to be at the forefront of the blog for a few days, but not enough to stay silent on the prorogation nonsense.

Nik Nannos claims that this issue won't have a "significant influence on voting behaviour". He hasn't done any surveys on the subject, apparently he doesn't need to - he's that tapped into the Canadian psyche. Impressive job, Nik.

I feel just as qualified to have a different opinion. I, too, haven't done any surveys on the subject. Who needs them? I looked on facebook and couldn't help but notice an ever growing group of dissatisfied citizens. The fantastic knitters over on Ravelry's forum Canadian Issues Debate seem genuinely PO'd, they are bandying about terms like undermining of democracy, abuse of executive power, and totalitarian government.

So who is more in touch with the zeitgeist of our nation? Time will tell.

Dear Canada,

Do you believe in government-provided social programs or in privately-funded programs? Pick one, because lately you've been doing neither and it stinks.

Successive governments, both federally and provincially, have cut taxes and programs, at your behest Canada. (Alberta, I'm looking right at you.) So you have more money in your pockets, and yet no less than the Fraser Institute is saying things like:

...the percentage of tax filers donating to charity fell in almost every Canadian province between 1997 and 2007...

You know what else they are saying?

If Canadians had given the same percentage of their aggregate income to charity as Americans had, Canada’s charities would have received an additional $10.1 billion in private donations.

Stop pretending to be the nicer version of our neighbours to the south, because baby it ain’t true. Wake up Canada you can’t have it both ways – low taxes and excellent services. It’s time to start showing some charity.

Other interesting facts:

• A higher percentage of tax filers donated to charity in the United States (26.6%) than in Canada (24.0%) during the 2007 tax year. Similarly, Americans (at 1.60%) gave a higher percentage of their aggregate income to charity than did Canadians, (at 0.73%).
• The Fraser Institute calls this a substantial generosity gap.
• This generosity gap undoubtedly limits the power and potential of charities to improve the quality of life in Canada.
  
• US numbers are actually larger than the stats above, because American tax law is such that some people may donate to registered charities but not be able to claim those donations on their taxes.
  

*All quotes are from here.

Peace and a Happy Chanukah

We spent last night with a group of friends to celebrate Chanukah. Towards the end of the evening we discussed the power of focusing on positive thoughts. It is easy and, for me, often overwhelming to focus on what is wrong with the world. I recall now, that I started the other blog to show myself the beauty of life. Funny that I'm more often found here ranting about everything that I see as wrong with the world.

There is power in intention. I know this. So I'd like to send a wish for peace and a happy Chanukah to all of the members of ibn Ezra, Ta’ayush, and everyone working for peace in the middle east. Bless you and blessed be.

Dear Canada,

Remember the days of G.W. Bush, when we were so happy and proud to be Canadian and across the border (and therefore removed from) a government run by idiots? I regret laughing and pointing now, because it seems we are the new scourge of the World. How did this happen? (Don't tell me, I know how it happened - Liberal corruption and ineptitude + Peter MacKay + the Bloc + Alberta = Steve and his yahoos running our country.)

George Monbiot states in a recent column for the Guardian, "So here I am, watching the astonishing spectacle of a beautiful, cultured nation turning itself into a corrupt petro-state."

So here I am asking, begging, and yelling at all Canadians to send our government a message - preferably this message, written by my lovely spouse:

(just copy and paste into an email and send it off to Steve at pm@pm.gc.ca)

Dear Prime Minister Harper:

There was a time not long ago when Canada was well-respected for being environmentally friendly. We were a country that prided itself on environmental awareness. Unfortunately, Canada has squandered this reputation, and is now regarded by much of the world as part of the climate change problem instead of being part of the solution.

Global warming is the greatest threat to life on earth. Entire populations and ecosystems are threatened by the devastating impacts of droughts, heat waves, fires, floods, storms and rising sea levels. Two key examples illustrate these dangers:

• The president of the Maldives Islands has announced that he would begin searching for a new homeland for his people because his country may soon entirely disappear due to rising sea levels;
• Australia has been experiencing a prolonged, severe drought that is resulting in a shortage of drinking water for its population.

There are many more examples of such crises. Climate science tells us that, to avoid worsening patterns of dangerous climate change, the world’s greenhouse gas emissions must peak in just a few years – mostly likely by 2015 – then drop off drastically. The new agreement to be reached in Copenhagen will likely last until 2020.

The developed world – of which Canada is a vital part – has created 75% of all carbon pollution since 1850. It only makes sense that richer countries like Canada should take a leadership role in coming up with solutions to this global crisis.

Battles in history have not been won by quitting. I call on the Canadian government to restore our country’s fallen reputation. Seize Copenhagen as an historical opportunity to create the following positive, meaningful changes for everyone:

• Set a national target to cut greenhouse gas emissions at least 25% from 1990 levels by 2020 (China, Norway and Scotland have already pledged 40% cuts)
• Implement an effective national plan to reach this target and help developing countries reduce their emissions and adapt to climate change;
• Adopt a bold, strengthened second phase of the Kyoto Protocol at the pivotal United Nations Climate Conference in Copenhagen;
• Provide subsidies for green technologies like wind and solar power, which will create skilled jobs and fuel our national economy.

The Government of Canada must act NOW to make climate change our highest priority.

Sincerely,

Dear Steve,

Happy first day of Copenhagen!

I know you and the Globe and Mail, believe that the tar sands should not be on the table at the UN Climate Change Conference. The tar sands create 5% of Canada's greenhouse gases (as well as lakes of sulfuric acid and other toxic pollutants, which we delightfully refer to as tailings ponds) and yet they account for only 1.5% of Canada's GDP. To be clear, we are contributing to a potential climate catastrophe for a lousy 1.5% of our GDP. What is the price of catastrophe? Is 1.5% of our GDP worth it? Should we ask my son? His generation will be cleaning up the environmental disaster when those bloody dams holding the tailings ponds fail and the toxins are leached into the Athabasca and its watershed. Suncor et al will run for the hills and the Canadian taxpayers will foot the bill for clean up. Will 1.5% seem worth it then? Somehow I doubt it.

So, Steve, if you can please get your head out of the tar sands and do the right thing in Copenhagen.

Cheers!
Karen

Dear Canadian Taxpayers,

How often have you opened the mail to find a black and white piece of propaganda from a politician in another riding? Usually they contain an inflammatory headline and a portion you can return with check boxes beside the names of each party leader. You are supposed to select the leader that you think is "tough on crime" or "has the best tax reduction strategy". Did you know that we, Canadian taxpayers, pay for these pieces of party propaganda? Am I the only one who naively thought that these were paid for by the MPs or their parties?

These ten percenters, called such because MPs are allowed to send as many pamphlets as 10% of their riding, are an outrageous example of party politics. Though recently members of the NDP and Liberal party have been outraged by false accusations in some ten percenters sent out by Conservative MPs, none of the parties seem to be calling for an end to the program. Why would they? They all benefit from the free advertising. The only ones who don't benefit from it are Canadians. We have to deal with the false information in the pamphlets, our recycling bins get filled with them, and then we pay the bills (printing, postage and return postage for those who respond to the ridiculous checklists). It's time to say enough to all parties. If they want to campaign, inside or outside of election time, they can pay for it themselves.

We're done indulging political parties and paying for their games.