Category Archives: The Issues

Caveat emptor, Provincial

Reality begins to set in.

Leave a comment

I was watching the 11 PM CTV news on Saturday September 18 and got a certain satisfaction as well as a chuckle from their report on the anti-HST campaign where the CTV Vancouver news department, for the first time by any mainstream media, began to ask people about the $1.6 Billion that the federal government paid to the BC government to enact the HST and that would return to federal government coffers if the HST were to be repealed.

The people they interviewed on camera both felt that it was better to keep the HST than to return the $1.6 Billion to the federal government. The report also cited emails from people who had signed the anti-HST petition asking how they could get their name off the petition now that they were aware of the $1.6 Billion consequence of repealing the HST.

Of course the organizers of the anti-HST, are trying to obscure the reality of the $1.6 Billion dollar cost by speaking of negotiating with the federal government even though there is nothing to negotiate as the purpose of the payments to BC were specifically for the purpose of inducing the BC government to implement the HST.

The first payment was tied to the introduction of the HST legislation, the second was tied to the day the HST came into effect and the final $475 million is payable on the first anniversary of the HST becoming law.

Clearly the federal government made the $1.6 Billion payments to the BC government for the enactment of the HST and is entitled to a refund if BC violates the agreement by repealing the HST; the same contract law that applies to individuals and corporations applies to governments as well.

There is no need for the federal government to negotiate if the HST is repealed in BC. If BC reneges on its HST agreement with the federal government they can reclaim, would be entitled to reclaim, any monies due them by the simple expedient of reducing transfer payments to BC by the amount they are owed.

Since the federal government makes transfer payments for healthcare and education exceeding the $1.6 Billion level they don’t need to ask the BC government for repayment, they can simply deduct any monies due the federal government for repeal of the HST from the transfer payments.

That is the reality of the consequences of repealing the HST and no matter how Mr. Vander Zalm, Carole James, the NDP and the anti-HST campaign wiggle or obfuscate this will remain the reality.

Which one hopes will leave Carole James and the NDP to explain how it is that they propose to increase spending on education and healthcare at the same time they are advocating, championing, cutting the $ 1.6 Billion in federal HST funds out of the BC budget.

And Mr. Vander Zalm et al to explain why it was they failed to address this major consequence of repealing the HST as part of their anti-HST campaign.

Mental Health, Poverty

Johnny Winter – Livin’ the Blues

Leave a comment

It had been so long since I had been able to go to a venue to enjoy a musician I liked live that I had forgotten the sheer pleasure, the joy, to be found in great music played LOUD. Played at a volume where the music hammers into and through you and sets your very core to vibrating in tune with the music.

From the moment that Johnny Winter’s band of Paul Nelson (guitar), Scott Spray (bass) and Vito Liuzzi (drums) were introduced and began to play – before Mr. Winter joined them on stage at the end of that first number – you knew you were in for a treat for the ears and the soul.

The first notes they played drove all thoughts but ‘man, are they tight’ out of your mind and made for an evening of spectacular music.

It was not the quality of the music that was the most impressive part of the evening. You expect great music from Johnny Winter. What strikes you is the seeming effortlessness with which Mr. Winter displays his mastery of the guitar, calling forth the musical sound that affirms him as a virtuoso.

From the opening notes played by the three members of Johnny Winter’s band to the final notes of Highway 61 the evening was a musical tour de force that left you energized, with a huge smile on your face and a joy that could be heard in your voice.

Nanaimo’s Mr. David Gogo’s solo acoustic blues was the perfect opening act for the evening. His solo acoustic performance allowed him to demonstrate his own mastery of the blues and the guitar without competing or being contrasted with Johnny Winter.

Switching back and forth between his two acoustic guitars Mr. Gogo demonstrated why he has ten albums under his belt and an impressive list of nominations and awards.

Mr. Gogo’s set was such that the first thing I did upon returning home was to go online to the Library to see which of Mr. Gogo’s ten CDs were available to be reserved, taken out and listened to.

It was a greatly enjoyable evening of outstanding music enhanced by the venue, Mission’s Clarke Theatre, were there were nothing but good seats.

One of the reasons that poverty grinds away at the spirit is that the revitalization of one’s soul and spirit that simple pleasures such as this evening of great Blues music with Johnny Winter and David Gogo provide is beyond one’s reach. While the price was incredibly reasonable for the music delivered by the performers, it might just have as well have been $10,000 for its lack of affordability on my budget.

The pleasure, joy, relaxation and memories provided me by the evening’s music came to me courtesy of an early Christmas present. Meaning that whatever else happens Christmas 2010 is already a great success in terms of gifts.

Thanks to Mr. Winter, Mr. Gogo and Mr. Earl for a most joyful, exhilarating evening of Smokin’ Blues.

Hmmm, Media

Obligation point?

Leave a comment

I am under no illusion, sufferer no delusions that media, the news departments, is other than a business and about the bottom line. Awareness of the profit motivation of news departments and the media means I do not share in the popular misconception that media and/or news departments have any interest in behaving in the best interests of the public, fair and balanced reporting or in making sure the public is fully informed on matters of governance or public policy issues.

The media are under no more obligation to behave responsibly or in the best interests of the public over the best interests of self, than any other citizen is.

Indeed, it could be argued that as media organizations are about making profits, in situations where irresponsible, self-centered behavior will benefit the bottom line the organizations are required to ignore the public interest and act selfishly.

Up to a point.

Determining that point is difficult because it lies in the realm of free speech and is a question of not only what is said but what is left unsaid, the questions left unasked.

We are all aware that the Supreme Court has said free speech ends at a point of yelling ‘FIRE’ in a crowded theatre when there is no fire.

What about a crowded theatre where, seeing there is a fire starting the media does not yell ‘FIRE’ but leaves the theatre to set up outside to photograph/video/report on the fire, damage and mayhem that ensues because that would make for much more compelling video and story that a small fire caught and put out in a timely manner?

If, by choosing not to put mikes in the faces of Mr. Vander Zalm, Ms James, the NDP and citizens to ask what they will cut in order pay the $1.6 billion cost of repealing the HST, is the media guilty of choosing to stand silent in order to photograph/video/report on the damage and mayhem that the HST issue is effecting?

In choosing not to bring the $1.6 billion dollar cost of repealing the HST to the forefront of the story, has not the media has made the choice to slip out of the theatre without alerting anyone to the fire so that they may profit from photographing/videoing/reporting on the fire, or in the case of the HST the anti-HST campaign.

Just as there is a limit to the right free speech (‘Fire!’) is there a limit to the right of not speaking (not shouting ‘Fire!’)?

At what point do the media become responsible, are the media liable for, the consequences – the loss of $1.6 billion of federal funds – of questions it chooses not to ask, actions it chooses not to take?

What about Carole James, the NDP and Mr. Vander Zalm? At what point do they become responsible and liable for the $1.6 billion cost of a HST repeal?

At what point is media, at what point are politicians, obligated to act in a responsible manner?