Wanted: Another Mike Harris (Or Maybe a Real One)

Fresh from a stinging rebuke at the polls, Ontario Conservative leader John Tory insists he will stay on, even though he himself failed to win a seat in the provincial parliament. This is much easier said than done. It's awkward to lead a party without a seat in the legislature, and Conservative stalwarts are laying the blame for their rout squarely on Tory. Knife sharpeners have seen a marked increase in business since last Wednesday night.

Hard-liners are probably thinking that it's time to steer the party sharply back to the right after two leaders who are perceived as social moderates have failed miserably to improve their fortunes. Pining for the days of Mike Harris, they may well opt to choose a leader with similar ideals or even mount a campaign to draft back Harris himself.

So over the next four years look for extreme right-wing policies to be championed by the Conservative party and its new right-wing leader such as:

1. Eliminating government-sponsored universal health care completely.
   
2. Eliminating the public school system and replacing it with a system of charter schools and vouchers.

I predict that it won't resonate with the public. The Harris years were an aberration. Ontarians are just not a bunch of rabid right-wingers. In the final years of the NDP government led by Bob Rae, the public was angry and mean. The economy was in a huge slump. People were paying high taxes and not seeing any improvement in their living standard. They were looking for someone to blame and take it out on. Harris gave them just that: poor people collecting welfare, labour unions and teachers. Add the carrot stick of lowering taxes and presto - you're the Premier.

However, as I expressed in a satirical piece posted on Usenet, Harris eventually lost favour with the public. By the time he jumped ship in 2002 Ontarians had come to realize what a malicious, spiteful and mean-spirited individual he is. I don't think Mike Harris will ever darken our doors again as a public official.

It will also be a long, long time before the Ontario Conservative party again swaggers through the halls of power.

John Tory - The Biggest Political Stumbler and Bumbler of All Time?

If the pollsters and pundits are to be believed - and they almost always are - one of the most inept political campaigns ever mounted will come to a humiliating end tomorrow evening. John Tory - the much-touted saviour, the deliverer of the Ontario Conservatives will not only lose the provincial election for his party, but will himself fail to win a seat in the legislature.

The blame for this unprecedented implosion falls squarely at Tory's feet. There are no advisors or bag men to use as scapegoats. All on his own he chose an issue based on principle (so he says - I think it was a blatant attempt at vote-grabbing) that blew up in his face. He proposed to extend public funding to private religious schools.

That sole plank in the Conservative platform became the defining issue of the entire election campaign, overshadowing all others including really important ones. John Tory found himself constantly defending his position against a mounting swell of irate voters. All the Liberals had to do was pull up some ringside seats and watch the pounding.

With 9 days to go before the election, Tory backed away from his proposal, saying it would be put to a "free vote," essentially guaranteeing that the measure would never pass. It was too little, too late. The subsequent polls showed that not only did Tory fail to make up any lost ground, the gap between his party and the Liberals either stayed the same or widened.

Tory's motto, repeated over and over again, was "leadership matters." I guess it does, but Tory has shown himself to be anything but an effective leader. Premier Dalton McGuinty has been assailed for breaking a key promise not to raise taxes, however he admitted he did it, knew it would be unpopular, explained his position, took a stand and did not back away. Sounds more like leadership to me. Tory, after realizing that his key promise was wildly unpopular, dropped it like a hot potato. Leadership? I think not.

Another point that can be argued is that a party leader has a duty and an obligation to get elected and represent the party's principles in the legislative assembly. Tory could have stayed in his former riding and been guaranteed a chance to return to Queen's Park. Instead, he chose a riding where he would be up against a popular opponent, Liberal Kathleen Wynne. He clearly underestimated how tough the fight would be. Once again, he failed to protect his party's interests.

There have been all sorts of other gaffes in Tory's joke of a campaign. He referred to the University of Ottawa as "U of Zero" and the comment was caught on YouTube. Yikes! In a televised ad, there is a graph behind him showing Conservative support faltering. Uh oh! When canvassing in his riding he couldn't wait to show reporters the house where he grew up. There was a Liberal sign on the front lawn. Yeesh!

If Tory does fail to win a seat, he would have to lead from the visitors' gallery in the house. His only hope to stay on as leader would be for an obedient party member from a safe riding to resign his/her seat and for Tory to run in a by-election. It's been done before, but usually only when a new leader without a seat is chosen. Not for one who was expected to deliver his party out of the political wilderness.

Election Fever (or John Tory's Theme Song "Flip, Flop, Fly")

Nine days to go before an Ontario provincial election. The two main parties duking it out for power are the Liberals and the Conservatives. (Although the word is included in the full party name, there is nothing "progressive" about the Ontario Conservative party. Ever since it was shanghaied by Mike Harris in 1990 it has been a far-right mob akin to the former federal Reform Party. The current leader of the Conservatives, John Tory, passes himself off as a moderate, but I'm skeptical. I never heard him denouncing the divisive policies Harris implemenmted during the 1990s. If fact, I'd never heard of him, period.)

With a last name like Tory, you can bet that John is a dyed-in-the-wool conservative. Many of his political ilk have seen him as a saviour who would lead the Conservative party to certain victory in the upcoming election. But even his most ardent supporters must now be questioning his political judgement. Before the election call Tory had a decided advantage over Liberal leader and Premier Dalton McGuinty. During the 2003 campaign McGuinty promised not to raise taxes. (Taxes are a touchy point with Ontario voters. They once bought into the Mike Harris con job that they can have low taxes, but still enjoy top-level universal health care and a quality educational system. Harrris lowered taxes all right, but left health care and education in a shambles.)

But soon after being voted into power, McGuinty levied a health care premium, claiming that the previous Conservative government left a huge deficit, and the money was needed to fix the health system. This became the most visible of what McGuinty's opponents would call an endless string of "broken promises." It resonated with the voters, and all John Tory had to do was repeat it over and over like a broken record.

But what does Tory do? Unveils an election pledge to extend public funding to all private religious schools. It's only fair, he said, because Catholic schools get government funding (according to a provision in the 1867 Canadian constitution). How Tory failed to see that this would overshadow all other issues in the campaign is hard to comprehend. It turned into a very controversial proposal, with some two-thirds of the electorate against it. You can say what you like about the Liberal party, but they're not ones to look a gift horse in the mouth. By vocally defending the status quo of public schools, and they were off the hook for broken promises.

Tory's scheme blew up in his face. Voter opposition swelled, and even his own party members started to abandon him, vowing to vote against the measure. To make matters worse, polls suggest Tory might lose in his own riding where he is running against the current education minister Kathleen Wynne. (Another bad judgment call on Tory's part. Why didn't he stay in his former riding which is the safest Conservative seat in the entire province? The people there will always vote Conservative even if the candiadate is the embodiment of the Frankenstein monster.)

Yesterday, in a policy speech, Tory reversed himself on the religious school issue, hoping to turn the campaign around. In doing so, Tory has handed the election to the Liberals on a silver platter. The advantage over broken promises has been wasted, and his mantra "leadership matters" now has a hollow ring. The Conservatives had better stop using spin doctors from the private clinics Tory proposes to implement into the health care system.

Car Scratch Fever

Things were starting to look up. After just one day of banishment to the "bad cat box" my cat started to behave himself. Before that, he was prancing around, meowing and waking up the entire household at 3:00 am. He'd jump up on any surface available and knock stuff on the floor. He seemed to react to the gentle chastisement. Ever since, he's been a perfect angel (perhaps not surprising since his name is Angel). And my impatiens finally seem to have spurts of life in them.

Elated, I drove to the local drug mart to take advantage of bargains in mundane household items like paper towels, toilet tissue and soap. It's a small parking lot and usually quite busy, but on this Friday afternoon I found a spot with empty places on both sides. Perfectly safe, or so I thought.




When I came back to the car a lady approached me and said that the driver on my left had scratched my car upon parking. Sure enough; not a huge mark but very visible and flecked with blue paint. The car beside me was a blue Toyota. I thanked the lady and she provided her name and number and offered to be a witness. She described the driver as an "old lady." I was half expecting the poor woman to be in her 80s with an accent like Mrs Doubtfire and I would be heartbroken to approach her about the incident.

I wrote down the licence number of the offending car and waited for the driver. When she appeared, she wasn't that old - around 60 - but she turned out to be most vile, rude and obnoxious person I've had the misfortune to deal with. She denied up and down that she ever hit may car. When I showed her the blue paint scuffs on my side panel and the scratch on her car, she shouted "I've had that mark for 5 years! You're scamming me! You weren't even here when I parked! There was nobody!"

There was yet more ranting when I mentioned my witness. "She didn't see anything! It's a frame up! She's a friend of yours!" Then the car to her right changed from being non-existent to a black sedan to a Jeep. " Some other blue car hit you! It wasn't me!"

I requested her information as required by the Highway Traffic Act. She repeatedly and obstinately refused. This is an infraction that calls for quite severe penalties:

The penalty for failing to report a collision and/or failing to provide the necessary information is a fine of $200 to $1,000, three demerit points, a possible jail term and driver's licence suspension.The penalty for leaving the scene of a collision includes seven demerit points.

Normally the police don't come to an accident scene but when I called and described the situation they did send an officer. He demanded that she give me her information, and when he viewed both cars, he told the woman that it didn't look good for her. He ordered her to report to a Collision Reporting Centre within 24 hours. I needed to go as well, something I needed like a hole in the head.

Still, the damage was easily worth $1000 and I was determined that the guilty party pay. It's a pretty slick operation at the CRC. They take down the information, look at the vehicles and make a determination of fault.

This is how I expect it to play out: I will have my car fixed at the place of my choosing. I will be able to rent another car during the repair period. My insurance company will handle the claim and pay the whole shot under Direct Compensation with zero deductible. The other driver's insurance company will accept 100 per cent responsibility, and her rates will go up.

As well they should. The innocent motoring public needs to be protected from unconscionable drivers like this who think nothing of trying to pull off a hit-and-run.

Banter With the Right and the Conrad Black Sentencing Pool

I enjoy engaging right-wingers every now and then. I find their "me-first" attitude unfortunate and their sense of moral superiority amusing. But I try to refrain from the name-calling and insults that seem to characterize right-wing discourse. During the 2003 Ontario Provincial election, Liberal leader (and now Premier) Dalton McGuinty was called "Dalton McSquinty" and "Dalton McGimpy" by supporters of then-Conservative leader and Premier Ernie Eves (who, despite initially passing himself off as a moderate, saw the light just before the campaign and embraced a far-right platform).

I sign my name "Denny" in most on-line discussion groups and when I weighed in on the reaction to Conrad Black's convictions, one of Black's hard-line backers called me "Denny Lane." If the poster was referring to lead singer Denny Laine of the Moody Blues, then the attempt at an insult probably backfired. Anyway, that person's bluster was so devoid of logic that I felt quite confident this time leaving a right-winger with the last word.

Last night I was talking to an old friend who is also an avid right-winger, and like most of his ilk, said that Black was "railroaded" and didn't do anything wrong. Where we got into it was the sentence that Black will be handed down on November 30th. He said it will be 2 years or less, which had me gasping with disbelief. The obstruction charge alone carries a maximum 20 year penalty, then there are 3 fraud charges, each with a 5-year maximum. While I certainly don't think Black will get the maximum on each and receive consecutive terms, I believe it will be more than 10 years and most likely 12. Anyway, we placed a bet for 50 bucks - he says 2 years or less and I say 5 years or more. I guess if it's anywhere greater that 2 and less than 5, nobody wins.

Enough, already. I'm not going to write a single thing more about Conrad Black until sentencing day, and maybe not even then (especially if I lose the bet). I've got more pressing things to concern myself with.

First, trying to get my cat to behave.

Second, trying to get my impatiens to grow.

Is the Green-Eyed Monster Responsible for Conrad Black's Demise?

The conviction of Conrad Black on charges of fraud and obstruction of justice is the biggest news to hit Canada in quite some time. Black has been both a Canadian icon and pariah, both revered and loathed. Still, I believe that even his greatest detractors cannot help but be fascinated by him. I have always dismissed the man as a pompous blowhard. When he renounced his Canadian citizenship to become a British Lord, I just shook my head and considered him one of the most eccentric oddballs around. But then, as Kramer observed of the Soup Nazi on Seinfeld, "most geniuses are."

There have been myriad reactions to Black's convictions and most opine that the jury was conscientious and methodical and their verdicts fair. Some responses have been vigorous in defending Black, saying that he was railroaded, the prosecution was like a hunting safari obsessed with bagging a Lord, and that Black was "wrongfully convicted." The commonality in just about every one of these posters is that they share Black's ultra-right wing political ideology.

But by far the most over the top remark was this one: "It's human nature to want what other people have, and if you can't get it, then you destroy what that other person has. This is called JEALOUSY with a huge dose of ENVY."

I've never read such hogwash. Black is not the wealthiest man on the planet; there are people with far more riches to induce even more jealousy. To follow this logic, they'd all be dogged by prosecutors - Warren Buffet, Bill Gates, Ted Turner. No. Black's trial followed lengthy investigations by the US Justice Department and the SEC. And just how does a person get investigated in the first place? Let's see - there are suspicions that said person did something untoward? There we go; no suspicions, no investigation. It's as simple as that.

The government produced evidence of wrongdoing, and a jury with no preconceived notions of guilt or innocence concurred with some if not all of the accusations.

With his attitude, Black literally triple-dog-dared the authorities to come after him. He's had his day in court and now Black is headed off - not to the British House of Lords - but to the Big House.

The Eerie Nature of Number 13

I never considered myself to be afflicted with triskaidekaphobia. I've stayed on the 13th floor of hotels (whenever they've had one) and I've flown in planes on Friday the 13th. I've never hesitated to buy a baker's dozen of bagels. But I'll just bet there's at least one person who may come down with the disorder - Conrad Black. The controversial Canadian business tycoon was found guilty of obstruction of justice and 3 counts of mail fraud following a four-month trial in a Chicago court.

When you look at the numbers involved in the proceedings, there's a spooky common factor. Black was charged with a total of 13 felony counts. The most serious conviction for obstruction relates to Black removing 13 boxes of documents from his Toronto office, contrary to a court order. Of 42 counts against Black and his 3 co-defendants there were 13 guilty verdicts returned. The jury's decision was returned on Friday the 13th.

The prosecution says it will ask for Black to serve between 15 and 20 years in prison. I will become a complete believer in the power of this mystical number should Black be sentenced to 13 years. Sentencing is set for November the 13th - I'm kidding - November 30, 2007.

PUMPKIN

1992 - 2007

One Picture Says it All

It's Greek To Me

Over the weekend I visited The Frat. The one I belonged to when I was an undergraduate at the University of Toronto. I never thought I would ever be considered frat material. To me, the quintessential frat member had Hollywood looks, was captain of the football team, and his girlfriend was the head cheerleader. In school I was clumsy at any and all athletics, only average-looking and extremely shy with the opposite sex. Nevertheless, I was "rushed" by my classmate John, accepted by the guys and endured an "initiation" during which I pretty much had to check my pride at the door.

The frat experience was mostly a positive one. I rose in ranks on the executive and served as chapter president in my final school year. I overcame my fear of speaking in public. But as the years went by, I felt it was time to put away the interests from my past and move on. Life in a student frat chapter has always been, and still is, based on partying until sun-up and chasing skirts.
Still, I felt compelled to accept an email invitation and meet the new members who had just been "initiated." There has been a renewal of interest in the frat recently. The house has been spruced up with an influx of donations of time and dollars from alumni. The student chapter has a good number of members who all seem quite keen. The new members are very nice, polite and intelligent. But they're so YOUNG looking. Either they keep getting younger or I'm getting older with every passing year. I'd like to think it's the former.

The Frat circa 1971. I am in the front row third from the right (wearing glasses).

John, the classmate who brough me in, is in the middle row 3rd from the left.

You Can't Fight City Hall

Nor, it seems, can you change the makeup of City Council. In the Toronto election it was, as usual, the incumbents who were mostly returned to their seats. It's next to impossible for a challenger to win against an incumbent at the municipal level. The field is opened up only when an incumbent retires, then the new elected official has that seat for as long as he or she wants. In one of the open races, the candidate who won is a television journalist. This, I think, is an unfair advantage over other hopefuls who don't have the same visibility.

The person I voted for as mayor came in second last. My choices for both councillor and school trustee ran a distant second. Once someone gets a municipal office, they can pretty well do anything they want and still get returned time after time. Like a councillor who showed up drunk at a hockey game, acting rude and obnoxious, swearing and insulting everyone around him. Later he lied and said he was never there, but confessed when pressured about it. Did he get voted off city council? You guessed it - he coasted back to victory.

But if I was disappointed at the Toronto results, journalist Christopher Hume was downright despondent. He called the Toronto voters "dangerously contented" and even though they seemed to want change, opted "for the same old, same old." He even goes as far as to question why we bother voting. There were however a few upsets in the municipalities surrounding Toronto. Jim Coyle of the Toronto Star viewed this as a "fine mix of the old and new."

Nothing has changed much since 1982 when I ran for school trustee myself. I ran against a lady who had been acclaimed several times and now was miffed because she had to get campaign literature printed. She needn't have bothered; she kicked my ass. People told me that you have to get your name in the news and it doesn't matter whether it's for something good or bad.

Maybe I'll resurrect my political career yet. I'll knock off a few banks, engage the police in a high-speed chase and consign my stolen car to a watery demise in Lake Ontario. Then run for Prime Minister.

Old School

It's municipal election day across Ontario. The polling station where I voted was in the very school that I attended from Kindergarten to Grade Eight. I've set the Wayback Machine for the spring of 1963. Lester B Pearson was Prime Minister of Canada. John F Kennedy was President of the United States. It was recess time and my classmate Wayne and I were deep in discussion about one of the issues of the day. Wayne loved talking about current events; he was much more up on it that I was. Wayne was also more articulate and a better debater than me, but I never understood why his grades weren't better than mine.

We were interrupted by a shrill, stentorian voice. "What are you doing here!" It was Mrs. T, the walking definition of the stereotypical "old bat" schoolmarm. The school had two entrances designated as "Girls" and "Boys." So also was the schoolyard divided into girls' and boys' sides. Wayne and I hadn't watched where we were going and had inadvertently wandered onto the girls' side. This was an eggregious faux pas. For some reason, seregating the girls and boys outside the classoom was deemed crucial by the educators of the time.

"Who's your teacher," she demanded of us. "Mr. Scott," we replied. "Well, since you like it on the girls' side so much, I expect to see you lined up with Mr. Scott's girls when class is called back in!" The only way she could embarass us more was to demand that we go into class naked. "I don't know about you but I'm not doing it," Wayne said. I had never bucked authority before, but I was so impressed with Wayne's fortitude that I joined my companion in defying Mrs. T. We went back into class with our fellow boys, acting like nothing had happened.

It wasn't long before Mrs. T came to speak to Mr. Scott and we we summoned into the hallway. We were told to apoligize to Mrs T and Mr Scott assured her we would be dealt with. I think Mr. Scott was inwardly chuckling his bald head off. He was a very kind man, a passionate teacher and in no sense a disciplinarian. We were given a week's detention for half an hour after school. On the first day Mr. Scott explained that we should never be rude to our elders. He also pointed out that we would be going to high school in September and if we wanted he would give us a head start on the subjects. We accepted his offer.

Mr. Scott taught us algebra, French, physics and chemistry. When the week was over, we asked him if he would be willing to continue the lessons for the rest of the school year. He obliged, and when we told our classmates what was happening, about a dozen asked to join in and stay after class. When I started high school, the first months were a breeze because of the prep work Mr. Scott has given us. I heard a while ago that Mr. Scott had departed this mortal coil. If there's a place in heaven for wonderful teachers, he's surely its principal.

When I showed up at the school to vote, I defiantly strode up to the Girls' door. It was locked. The main entrance is now the Boys' door. I wondered how they knew that 43 years later I would be looking to redress an old injustice.

Decisions Decisions

I have made my choices for the Toronto municipal elections being held tomorrow.

Mayor. The incumbent mayor David Miller has been an utter disappoinment. There's been no leadership; no initiatives; no vision. During the 2005 "summer of the gun" violence which rocked the city, the mayor was slow to react, and never offered any concrete ideas, let alone plans, to address the situation.

The problem is, the supposed frontrunners are also duds. Challenger Jane Pitfield doesn't know which end is up, and Johnny-come-lately candidate Stephen LeDrew is a joke.

I looked through the list of 38 candidates and saw a name I recognized. John Weingust has campaigned for better control of city parking, which has been a mess. The rules change from one street to another, and if you don't watch the signs like a hawk, you'll face a hefty ticket or even get towed. For a time in the 1990s, the private towing industry made millions of dollars in towing fees when the city permitted tows to be ordered from private property for the most spurious of reasons.

Maybe Mr. Weingust is a one-issue candidate, but it's an important one, and he has my vote.

Councillor. Incumbent Howard Mosoce has got to go. He's a loudmouth, a blunderbuss, a bully. He's been accused of using city property for his pesonal use. But the final straw was when his crew put campaign signs on every front lawn in the ward, without asking. His response? "Just let us know if you don't want them and we'll take them away." I pulled up my sign and trashed it immediately. I'm voting for Ron Singer. He seems a little too conservative for my liking, but if he works hard for the ward, I'll be happy.

School Trustee. I'm voting for Mark Riczu. Whenever a smear campaign comes along telling me I must not vote for a certain candidate and offers up another slate which will vote as a block, I get nervous. I spoke to Mark - he's young and intelligent and involved with a volunteer organization dedicated to teaching math to youth. He's got my vote.

The polls close at 8 pm tomorrow. Get out and vote!

Remembering

The eleventh day of the eleventh month. At the eleventh hour I was at Toronto Old City Hall for the Remembrance Day service. The colour party marched past to sustained applause from the assembled crowd. Once the clock tower boomed out eleven times the bugler played The Last Post almost flawlessly. Two minutes of silence were followed by Reveille, then the National Anthem and the hymn O God Our Help In Ages Past. Toronto Mayor David Miller delivered a thoughtful and introspective address. After prayers, two school children read John McCrae's poem In Flanders Fields. The ceremony concluded with the laying of wreaths and a benediction. A touching service, and a fitting tribute to Canada's soldiers who have fallen both generations and mere days ago. Brave men and women all.

My uncle Vic Belton (1918 - 1991) served in WW II but hardly ever talked about it. The only story he related was seeing a truck in front of him being blown up at a bridge. Vic's brother and my dad Cecil Belton (1915 -1956) was also determined to serve, despite certain health issues. He joined the Royal Regiment of Canada, a reserve outfit which met weekly at Fort York. My dad was sent to training camp at Niagara-on-the-Lake, but he kept one big secret from his superiors - he was a diabetic. Just at sunrise each day he would steal away from the tents to self-administer his insulin shots. Dad was never called up for service and he told my Mom he wasn't sure how he'd handle his insulin requirements if he was sent off to war.

Cecil Belton with the Royal Regiment of Canada circa 1940.

The debate currently raging in Canada is why are troops are serving and dying over in Afghanistan. But today is a time to simply reflect on their sacrifices and to honour and admire them - for their committment to their country and for their heroism.

Who Needs Letters to the Editor? Okay, Maybe I Do!

I never promised outright that I wouldn't write another letter to a newspaper editor. Just not the Toronto Sun. I couldn't resist ; I E-mailed an abridged copy of the "unions taking over the TDSB" story to the Toronto Star. Time will tell whether I still have the knack ...

My, What a Big Slate You Have

In an Ontario municipal election, the most overlooked contests are arguably those for school trustee, who form the local school boards. Media coverage is usually minimal, the voters have trouble knowing who the candidates are and where they stand, and turnout is abysmally low. This was even the case before 1997, when school boards had the power to levy an education portion of property taxes at the municipal level. Fully half of one's property taxes went to education. And no one seemed to care. I remember a candidates' meeting where only the ones running for councillor showed up. "Where are the trustees," I asked. "They weren't invited," replied the chairman. "Not enough interest."

In 1997, the province took away the power of taxation from the school boards and it funded schools exclusively. The public involvement in school board elections waned even further. But there's been a flurry of interest in the Toronto race following an accusation of undue influence by unions.

I came across a letter addressed to "Parents and Voters in Toronto" that suggests the Canadian Union of Public Employees (CUPE) and unnamed "teacher unions" are fielding a "slate" of candidates in 21 wards with a view to gaining "union control" over the Toronto District School Board (TDSB). The letter's authors accuse the unions of hiding behind an organization called Campaign for Public Education (CPE). The letter is signed by outgoing trustee Peter Rutledge and parents Jane Steele Moore and Donna Wright.

I looked at the CUPE Web site and saw that labour is endorsing candidates not only for the TDSB but virtually every contested municipal seat across the province of Ontario. Now if endorsing candidates is equivalent to fielding a "slate" then this is a very impressive feat indeed.

I'm having a time understanding why a labour union endorsing candidates for office should raise an "alarm." Unions aren't in any public position of authority. In past municipal and provincial elections the Toronto Police Association openly backed certain candidates. This is a completely different matter and it didn't bring about nearly the public outcry it should have. I wonder if the writers of this letter were "alarmed" by the police endosements? To its credit, the police union isn't doing it this time.

The communique, long on innuendo and short on facts, recalls the union-bashing rhetoric from the days of former Premier Mike Harris. In fact, about the only thing missing from it is Mike himself denouncing "union bosses."

Having read this, I'm thinking maybe the schools ought to be run differently than they have until now, and status quo trustees replaced. These authors need to go back to school and bone up on their math. If only twelve of the labour-endorsed candidates win election, "control" of the board will be lost, they caution. They offer up their own "slate" of nine (incumbent) candidates. Just how is a bloc of nine supposed to maintain "control" in a field of twenty-two?

One Election Down, One More To Go

It's all but certain that the US mid-term elections have gone the way of the Democrats, with a clear majority in the house and the slimmest majority possible in the Senate (51-49). Ol' Dubya done got bucked off his bronco.

The municipal elections across Ontario will be held next Monday. As noted before, the one in Toronto is sleep-inducing.

The only race that comes into your living room is the one for mayor. However, each ward in the City of Toronto will also choose a councillor and public school board trustee. Unless you're Catholic, then you vote for a Catholic (Separate) school board trustee. The right of the Catholic church to have its own school system from Kindergarten to Grade 12 (and to teach religion in class) is guaranteed by the Canadian Constitution. The Catholic schools also receive public funding from the province.

I happen to be in favour of one public school system for all, regardless of one's faith. If you want religion to be involved, then it should be through private schools. A hotly debated topic in this province is whether private school tuition should count toward an income tax credit. The provincial Conservative party which held power from 1995 to 2003 is in favour of such a policy and had actually implemented it just before they were voted out. The Liberal party campaigned to eliminate the private school tax credit and did so soon after they formed the government upon winning the October 2003 election.

The ridings (electoral districts) within the city correspond to the ridings at the provincial and federal level. At one time the boundaries of federal and provincial ridings in Ontario were differently named and laid out, leading to a lot of confusion. The Conservative government under Premier Mike Harris (1995-2002) put the provincial ridings in sync with their federal counterparts. (It was the one sole action taken by Harris that I ever agreed with).

There are 22 provincial/federal ridings within the City of Toronto. Each is divided into 2 wards for a total of 44. Each of these 44 wards will elect a councillor. For public scool trustee, each riding becomes a single ward for a total of 22 trustees. Unless you're Catholic, in which case there are 12 wards for the Catholic (Separate) school board made up of combinations of the 22 wards. If French is your first language, then you elect a French Public Trustee in Wards 2, 3 and 4. Except that the Trustee in Ward 4 (Alain Masson) was acclaimed. If you're French and Catholic, you elect a French Separate Trustee in Wards 3 and 4. Except that the Trustee in Ward 4 (Claude Legere)was acclaimed.

For the purpose of electing a councillor, I reside in Ward 15. For public school trustee, I'm in Ward 8. If I were Catholic, I'd be choosing a separate school trustee for Ward 5. What could be simpler?

It's hard to miss who the leading candidates for mayor are, due to all the coverage. It's at the councillor and trustee level where the voters have to do their own digging to be informed. There was a complete list of who is running where across the Greater Toronto Area in today's Toronto Star. At the ward level you have to keep on top of things, such as be on the lookout for candidates' meetings (if any) or find out their stand on the issues. Contacting candidates can be a chore, especially if no campaign literature has been dropped at the door. Not all of them have a web presence.

I think I have narrowed it down who I'll be voting for in each office. That's for an upcoming blog. But for now, I'm going to try and find out what happened to the sun. It was shaping up to be a nice afternoon for this time of year.

The weather here has been as dreary as I'm sure the mood must be in US Republican war rooms. But just as I can be optimistic that the weather will improve by next May, the Republicans can take heart that their poster boy, AH-nold, coasted to victory for the governorship of Cal-ee-FAWN-Yah.

Another intersting result is that a propostion to ban same-sex marriage in Arizona was defeated by the voters.

http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/1108AzGayMarriage08-ON.html

It was widely thought that the measure would pass easily in a state that is seen as solidly conservative; Arizona being a Republican stronghold in recent presidential elections save for a relapse in 1996 when the state went to Democrat Bill Clinton. But maybe the issue is not so clearly divided along conservative-liberal lines.

Same-sex marriage in Canada is permitted under federal law, the final bill having passed easily in June 2005 through legislation introduced by a minority Liberal government. It was not quite a "free" vote - House of Commons members were free to vote as they wanted except for the Prime Minister's cabinet, who were required to vote in favour of the bill. At least one cabinet minister resigned his position in order to vote against the measure. The Liberal government proceeded with a same-sex marriage law after the courts in many provinces and ultimately the Supreme Court ruled that a ban was contrary to the Charter of Rights and therefore unconstitutional. Taking the safe way out, the government asked the Supreme Court to rule whether a draft bill would pass the Charter litmus test.

Since January 2006 Canada has been governed by a minority of the Conservative party led by Prime Minister Stephen ("Steve" as christened by Dubya) Harper. His government has vowed to re-open the gay marriage issue, but has taken its sweet time going about it, given that it was his first pledge during the election campaign. During an interview on a Global TV program called Focus Ontario, Harper's Finance Minister Jim Flaherty supported the initiative to again debate the issue. When asked to articulate the reasons behind his view, all he said, repeatedly, was "what's wrong with a free vote?" Flaherty wouldn't reveal his true feelings - that gay marriage stuck in his craw and he would not rest until the measure was rescinded. I'm sure however that certain conservative politicos south of the border would have no trouble with such a stance.

As things stack up, even with an actual "free" vote in the House of Commons, a motion to re-open the issue is certain to fail. A handful of Conservatives support gay marriage, a number of Liberals are against, but the Bloc Québecois and NDP are almost unanimously in favour.

This issue, along with capital punishment (which was abolished in Canada in 1976), is over and done with. It's time to move on with the really important matters.

Most of the dust has settled in the US mid-term election, and as most expected, it was not a fun time for the Republican party. By 11:00 pm on election day it was projected that the Democrats had won control of the House of Representatives, but even now the Senate result is too close to call. The Democrats had a little more trouble with the Republican "firewall" in the upper chamber. The most significant upset in the senate race was seen as the defeat of Rick Santorum in Pennsylvania, characterised as an ultra-conservative firebrand and even a presidential hopeful for 2008. Today the Republicans were putting their spin on the results, citing the public's "sour mood" and "self-inflicted injuries" as some of the reasons behind their losses. It was the first time I'd followed a US mid-term election and I noted certain terms that differ from Canadian ones such as a "district" and a seat "pick-up." In Canadian elections at the federal and and provincial level, the results that pour in after the polls close are described as "gains" and "losses," electoral districts are "ridings" and precincts are "polling stations." In municipal elections candidates most often run as individuals without party affiliations.

Last summer I spent a week in Northern Ontario with an Alaskan from Fairbanks. He was quite knowledgable about Canadian politics and familiar with most of the country's major issues. But I had him scratching his head when I explained the situation of minority government. It's something that doesn't happen in a two-party state.

The vote is seen as a repudiation of George W Bush and his administration. Observers wonder whether Bush will be more conciliatory if he also loses Senate control, or whether he will hunker down and resort to his veto powers.

Just when it couldn't get any worse for the US Republicans on the eve of an election. Word through the wires is that the actor who portrayed Doogie Howser, a beloved TV kid genius who embodied the principles of family, straightness and decency has declared his gayness!

In fairness to Mr. Neil Patrick Harris, there is some suggestion that he may have been outed before he was ready. I am opposed to outing. The decision when, or if, to come out is a personal one and a person's right to privacy should be respected.

Unless they're a hypocrite who privately hunkers down with the same sex while publicly denouncing same-sex-sex as "an abomination to God."