You can be forgiven if you’re only now remotely aware there’s a thing called Sun News, nevermind that it has an axe to grind with the CRTC. Its issue, which is a fair one insofar as there’s not a snowball’s chance in hell the playing field will change in the near future, is it’s not on the list of TV stations that are required carried on basic cable. Other all news stations, however, such as CTV News Channel, have been required on basic cable for years. Sun News would like to have that fixed. Level the playing field, they’ll call it. Which is accurate, if in the wrong direction.

To be completely fair, I’ve never watched Sun News. I don’t even know if the service I’ll be getting next month would entitle me to watch Sun News–although, more than likely not. So I wouldn’t know if its content would or wouldn’t be worthy of being required carried on basic cable–whatever that means these days. but I do know we shouldn’t even need to be having this conversation. because there shouldn’t need to *be* required carry channels.

Let’s look at it through this lense. I don’t watch that much TV–even when I do actually pay for the service. My honest to goodness TV watching consists of Hockey Night in Canada (except for this year) on CBC,, flipping to TSN, or Sportsnet. Occasionally, I’ll swing past CTV–if, as is sometimes the case, they’re airing something I haven’t gotten my hands on yet by way of alternate means. But more often than not, if I’m watching TV, I’m not sitting in front of my TV to do it. Political stuff, when I decide to watch a debate or somesuch live, I can usually get online. Movies, TV shows and the like–well, uh, yeah. Got it covered. If you have to guess how, still, you need you some rereading of older posts. It’s just the live sports content that keeps me glooed to cable. for 3–or 4, if you want to push things–channels, Rogers wants to charge me at least $50. And that’s before you add in anything interesting, like the Gameshow Network–which we’ll need to be adding for the other one what lives with me now. And $50 is probably lowballing, only because I don’t have actual exact numbers staring me in the face. Still, $50. For half a dozen channels. Do explain?

The only reason I stick with cable for live sports is really, if we’re being realistic, even at $50 for half a dozen channels it’s still far cheaper, and far less restrictive, than the halfway offerings by the leagues themselves–which, given I follow both baseball and–maybe again in the future–hockey, would work out to costing me nearly twice as much just for those two. And again, because they like to do this to their fans, you run the risk of not being able to actually tune in the *local* broadcast of the games to boot.

In the entry linked above, I called out the leagues-with help from a writer over at Techdirt for what they’re offering–or rather, what they’re not offering. But when I flip through doing the kind of math that leads me to my cable bill for the month, even that starts to look good. When I also factor in that outside of Hockey Night in Canada, there’s not much on some of the channels I’m forced to accept in order to get the 3 or 4 I do, I really can’t help but have the very wee small suspicion that maybe I’m being just a little teeny tiny bit ripped off.

The incredibly sad part about this mess? If the CRTC was interested, they could stick a fork in debates like this with one decision. Eliminate the entire concept of channels required to be carried on basic cable. Eliminate the entire concept of cable packages–basic, or otherwise. If John Q. Busy only ever has time to flip on CTV Toronto for the news while he has himself a supper, then let John Q. Busy pay for CTV Toronto out of pocket. Does he really need TSN, YTV, Fox and the like to go along with it? It’s not like he watches them, after all. On a more personal front, I had a couple TLC channels on a package I used to have, back when I used to watch more TV. But I never watched them. In fact, I forgot I had them until somebody what had working eyes was scrolling through the channel guide one afternoon. If I’d known a friend of mine who does watch them fairly regularly back then, the outcome would have been different. But as it was, when my company left I called up the cable guys, figured out which package threw those channels at me and very nearly tossed it–until I heard it included Sportsnet. Then I asked the poor sap on the other end of the phone who in their right mind puts a Sportsnet in the same package as a TLC in the first damn place. At least make them vaguely related, guys.

Cable and satelite companies have channels you can purchase individually already. NHL Center Ice is one such. The NHL Network, which I’m pretty sure has a couple of channels, is another. Your favourite sports team probably has one. They’re not part of any package. You make a phone call, you say I want $channel, and on your next bill the $2 or $3 it’ll cost you for $channel for that month says hello. They have the technology. So why are we still paying $50 for half a dozen channels? And why is the CRTC so scared to fix that? I’d be interested in the answer to that million dollar question–preferably, without the political talking points. I’d also be interested in a lower cable bill. So, CRTC, what gives?

For anyone not living in Canada, or anyone living in Canada who’s decided now would be a fine time to secure themselves under a rock, it might have gone missed that, for lack of a better way to put it, the natives are getting restless. They’ve started a series of protests, blockades and the like, that they’re calling “Idle No More”, which supposedly is meant to express several things all in one movement. If you ask Theresa Spence, a native chief who’s been on a hunger strike of sorts since before the official birth of this “movement”, it’s to protest the condition of native reservations, one of which has–well–its own problems independant of whatever the government may or may not have decided to do, or not (note: Spence is the chief of the reservation referenced in the linked article). Apparently, same goes if you ask any of the chiefs that support her–yes, still, even though she’s already moved her own goal posts several times in the span of a couple weeks. When they’re not also still smarting over the violation of a treaty their great great grandparents signed with mine (*), they’re insisting on a greater share of any and all resource-based industry that passes anywhere near, on or around what they believe is their lands–industry they aren’t even willing to approve anyway (see: northern gateway, keystone, etc). But, see, here’s the thing that passes me by. They want to be self-sufficient, which is completely and entirely reasonable–and they should be. But they want to do it by relying on their traditional way of life–hunting, fishing, escentially living off the land, as I’ve seen a few folks put it. That’s great too. I’d never presume to deny someone the right to live their life as they please. But I’ve never seen it actually explained how, in 2013, the natives who take up issues like this one plan to go about doing that.

In fact, I’ve seen it spelled out rather nicely exactly how, assuming the government agreed completely with those demands and gave them complete self-governance, complete with allowing them to go back to their traditional ways of life, it would very quickly fall apart. In short, from the day the treaties were signed, the natives’ hunting days were numberd.

It’s important to emphasize that these Treaty commissioners were not anthropologists or do-gooders. Notwithstanding their respect for the Cree, they came with a very specific mission: to set the stage for white commercial development in these territories.

For instance, the commissioners reported a meeting in Fort Hope, on the shore of Lake Eabamet, with a certain well-regarded chief named Moonias. At one point, a local Indian named Yesno (“who received his name from his imperfect knowledge of the English language, which consisted altogether in the use of the words ‘yes’ and ‘no’”) told the commissioners that the terms of the Treaty should ensure that natives in the area receive “cattle and implements, seed-grain and tools.”

This horrified the commissioners, who evidently wished to guard against unfulfilled expectations: “As the undersigned wished to guard carefully against any misconception or against making any promises which were not written in the treaty itself, it was explained that none of these issues were to be made, as the band could not hope to depend upon agriculture as a means of subsistence; that hunting and fishing, in which occupations they were not to be interfered with, should for very many years prove lucrative sources of revenue. The Indians were informed that by signing the treaty they pledged themselves not to interfere with white men who might come into the country surveying, prospecting, hunting, or in other occupations; that they must respect the laws of the land in every particular, and that their reserves were set apart for them in order that they might have a tract in which they could not be molested, and where no white man would have any claims without the consent of their tribe and of the government. After this very full discussion, the treaty was signed, and payment was commenced.”

What I am quoting here is the commissioners’ Nov. 6, 1905 report, not the actual text of the James Bay Treaty (which is brief). But it expresses the real nub of the intended treaty relationship: The natives would continue hunting and fishing for sustenance and trade, and receive annual payments from the government (four dollars, to be exact), while white men would have the right to put down their train tracks, mines, forestry operations and settlements. Some reserve lands were stipulated in a schedule to the treaty (“not to exceed in all one square mile for each family of five”), but the exact location of such lands was not then considered as important as it is now. That’s because the local Cree were semi-nomadic, and came and went with the hunt. (At Lake Abitibi, for instance, the commissioners reported: “We did not expect to find many Indians in attendance, as they usually leave for their hunting grounds about the first week in July.”)

As the article goes on to say, it’s that treaty, and the creation therein of this type of reserve, that’s still today being held over our heads–over a century later. The problem? We tried to bring the natives into what was then modern society. We just, well, only did it about halfway. oh, right–and by “we”, I mean the about, we’ll say, 1930 or so “we”.

Cree men such as Moonias and Yesno, were they still around, would be absolutely appalled by this state of affairs. They apparently believed they were negotiating Treaty terms that would permit them to continue to provide for themselves as rugged hunter-gatherers (and possibly farmers). The notion that the white man eventually would put them up in permanently subsidized year-round housing that allowed them to abandon hunting and fishing — the very heart of their culture — would have seemed alien and unexpected.

That move from semi-nomadic to settled life, which was seen in part as a humane gesture aimed at bringing natives into modern civilization, is the real “cultural genocide” we keep hearing about. It’s not a Stephen Harper plot. It’s something that happened mostly before Harper was born.

So wheres the halfway point? well, that would be right around this part of those self-same treaties.

Yet the altogether worst aspect of the James Bay Treaty is that, like other treaties, it ensured that reserve land “shall be held and administered by His Majesty, for the benefit of the Indians,” and that “in no wise [sic] shall the said Indians, or any of them, be entitled to sell or otherwise alienate any of the lands allotted to them as reserves.” This was basically Soviet-style communism, avant la lettre. To this day, this system of communal land ownership ensures that reserve-resident natives are the only people in Canada who are systematically denied the right to buy, sell, lease and mortgage their land.

This is the single most awful thing we ever did to the Indians: bring them into a settled, capitalist society, and then deny them the basic tools to generate capital. Yet, perversely, it is the one aspect of native policy that is consistently championed by left-wing native-rights advocates, who see in it a sentimental vindication of Marxism despite its European failures.

And this, combined with some one-time assistance to actually see to it the people on those reserves aren’t swept out to sea by the changes, is exactly what the people involved–be they native or not–should be pushing to be changed. At the moment, natives living on reserves have no actual attachment to the property they occupy. Nor are they actually allowed, legally, to have any attachment or place any value on those properties. Which is why, in communities like Attawapiskat, they made headlines when it became clear just how bad the housing situation was actually getting. And when they made headlines, they still had to wait for the government to do something about it–as opposed to anyone else, who can pretty much make any changes they please to their living arangements–including deciding to forget about paying rent and go buy a house across town. And it’s these remote, mostly fly-in communities, that protesters are saying should be allowed to do their own thing, their own way, in compliance with those self-same treaties. It’s those self-same communities that folks like Theresa Spence are saying the government should hand more money to, for presumedly very similar results. But complying with treaties from over a hundred years ago and giving natives their self-sufficience are mutually exclusive.

Ms. Spence and her Idle No More supporters are absolutely correct to say that the James Bay Treaty made provisions for Indians to get land, cash payments, and even some measure of autonomy. But ramping up those perqs won’t do anything to change the fact that the whole basis of the treaty was destroyed as soon as traditional native hunting life came to an end.

This is the fundamental reason that the Idle No More message on treaties is irrelevant: The great challenge of native policy in the 21st century will be to integrate natives into the larger economy that is based in Canadian population centers.

Remote fly-in communities such as Attawapiskat, on the other hand, are doomed: You can’t turn he clock back to 1905, or even to 1930.

And as much as that means folks like Theresa Spence would have to be out of a job, that has to be the simple reality. That should have been the reality years ago, but a combination of the government mucking it up and the natives fighting it lead to, well, the exact opposite. If being idle no more means fixing this system, and giving native people the ability to make themselves sufficient and get them off the government take, then by all means, please do be idle no more. But if, in seaking these changes, the natives can’t accept the fact that some traditions–some aspects of their culture–they want so badly to hold onto simply cannot survive a transition like that? To continue to hold to that expectation, and to insist the rest of Canada work around that expectation, will only continue to end up in situations exactly like this one. And really, honestly? I think we’re all getting a little tiny bit tired of reading headlines that start off with “Native Group Protests”. Just tossing that out there.

*: I can’t be a hundred percent sure how accurate that statement actually is, as I have great great grandparents on both sides of the issue. Pretty sure that puts me in a bit of a conflict of interest when writing a post like this. But, then, I never did give much thought to that kind of deal.

So coming on the end of November, we were still dealing with temperatures mostly above freezing. I mean sure, okay–there was that one minor little snow scare that made me go “oh shit where’s my portable shovel” a couple weeks ago, but for the most part, it’s been actually, you know, pleasant. Just at, or above, freezing–hell, we got as high as 17 degrees c week before last. Or was that last week? Whenever. Then yesterday, I woke up to ice on the sidewalk by our building and the threat of a snowpile by later last night/this morning. If what I’m reading’s anywhere near accurate, it’s a little more than a threat now–and a little more than snow. And Ottawa folks, here’s the kicker–it didn’t take for bloody ever this time.

I’m used to Ottawa’s weather paterns. Or rather, I’m used to what they *should* be. You get about half a foot of snow, maybe a day or two of freezing rain, then by the weekend, about 80% of it goes melt and we sit above freezing for another week or so. This year? december came and so did the holy fuck it be a cold one. So who ran off with our 1500 warnings? Or better yet, who’s bloody idea was it to slap me in the face with snow on get things done day? Oh, and if that idea came from Texas, you’re fired.

For years, you couldn’t do anything without them wanting to run a credit check on you. Wanna rent an apartment? Credit check. Apply for a mortgage, or creditcard? Credit check. Sign up with most cell phone cariers? … Yeah. You get the picture. Pretty effective way of keeping an eye on folks, right? So you’d think Canada’s government would be all over it. Well, they are. Just recently. They’ve decided to use it to try and step on businesses tasked with collecting the GST (General Sales Tax) or HST (Harmonized Sales Tax) for the government, and have already gone after $3000000 worth of it. The plan is to eventually (read: probably in about 15 years) use it to make sure folks aren’t taking advantage of things like, you know, welfare when they aught not to be. But right now, it’s a tax grab. Still, even for a tax grab, it’s about damn time. As long as this kinda thing’s been around, you’d think they’d be the first. But, then, since when does that apply up here?

If you have a social insurance number, which you must if you plan to do something as simple as, you know, work in Canada, you may find yourself surprised next year. In March, anyone in need of a new or replacement social insurance card will instead be sent a letter with their SIN number. Why? for your protection, says the government. The card, which the Service Canada’s website insists you should never have on you–in spite of the fact Service Canada employees usually ask to see it–is a good excuse for someone to walk off with your identity should it go missing. again, says the government. So now, rather than spend the money on printing and shipping the actual social insurance card, they’ll spend less money printing and shipping a letter to you that contains the same info. Which you’ll still need, most likely, to provide to folks like, you know, Service Canada to get pretty much anywhere. And, which folks will more than likely still carry on them simply because, hey, it’s asked for in situations. All for your protection, and to save a million and a half. Anyone else feel much safer after reading this?

From the “it’s about goddamn time” department, the folks what run this country are actually doing something else that makes sense and is long overdue. For folks not so familiar with the workings of Canada, we have two official languages. Well, unless you live in Quebec–then there’s one, with grudging acknowledgement of some kind of second language type thing going on over there. thing about it is, people coming to Canada weren’t required to actually learn either of those languages. That makes things really quite interesting–particularly when I run to the store across the street and the guy serving me can speak an entire… maybe… 4 words in English (that’s another entry). The folks over at Citizenship and Immigration would very much like to change that. A new thought bubble to be floated out of the downtown core is that folks wanting to apply for citizenship must now be able to prove, in writing, their proficiency in at least one of our two official languages–English, or French (yes, Quebec, that probably includes citizens who want to live there). Now, here’s a question. How long before somebody on the opposition benches turns that into an attack on immigrants? Any ideas?

Forget about trying to bring ODSP up to date–a thing I’ve been doing off and on for a couple years, now. Somebody’s been prodding the federal government in the ass a time or six. They’ve now decided, scheduled for 2016, that any and all payments from them–like, say, your income tax refund–will be handled via direct deposit. Keep in mind direct deposit’s been around for years. They call it in the name of saving money, but finally catching up to technology would be another way to look at it. Now, if we could just do something about the fact there’s still places around here that don’t take debbit–KFC here in Ottawa, I’m staring directly in your direction.

Toronto has all manner of somewhat decent hockey teams–hey, the Leafs aren’t in last place yet, okay? But I’d still rather gouge my own eyes out with a pitchfork than consider living there. One of the reasons for that would be city councellor Giorgio Mammoliti, who’s recently made headlines for suggesting that Toronto should become its own province. Let’s put this into perspective just a little. Toronto’s previous mayor, David Miller, pretty much spent the hell out of what money he got from the province of Ontario–and some extra, just to make sure he got it all. Current mayor Rob Ford is insisting he can cut spending, and all he’s managed to do is cut his support–in more than half, actually. Oh yeah, and Toronto’s still spending money like it’s going out of style. So why does councellor Mammoliti want Toronto to be its own province, you may ask?

He told the Toronto Sun he is frustrated federal and provincial governments aren’t doing enough for municipalities.

He maintained if Toronto was a province it would qualify for transfer payments from Ottawa.

So, basicly, if toronto was a province, the rest of Canada would have to give them more money they likely would have just as much (read: absolutely no) trouble finding things to do with due to the way equalization’s been set up, and the fact they’re bleeding red out both ends. Yeah, tell you what. No. Spend a few million less, then maybe talk to us about separation. Quebec could use some company on that front. Or better yet, just get rid of Giorgio Mammoliti.

So yesterday, partially inspired by a conversation I had with Trish and Roger over the weekend, I explained–not for the first time–in detail why it is this provincial election thing just isn’t doing it for me. And why the federal election–only a few months ago, for the record–did only slightly more than that for me. And now, or rather a while ago, the 3 leading parties have produced another in a long list of reasons for yesterday’s entry–in the form of their reaction to this year’s rent increases. Back in August, an increase was granted of a maximum of 3.1%, or higher than any previous increase since the late 90′s or early 2000′s. The basic reaction of all 3 major parties? Ow, that sucks. The liberals are making noises about reexamining the legislation after the election, with not much in the way of actual specifics on what they’d change. The conservatives are making the same noises with the same kind of specifics or lack thereof. And the NDP’s just making noises–I think they just like to hear what they sound like, personally. Meanwhile, those of us who can’t aford to buy a place to call home and don’t want to live in mom’s basement have been forewarned to hang on to our wallets–it’s about to get wicked nifty not so cool. This happens a lot in recent elections–an issue comes up that’s got a pretty significant enough number of people pissed off, and gives anyone with half a brain cell a golden opportunity to do something–oh, I dunno–different with it. Then, within a few days of it being talked about, all 3 parties come out with an answer at the same time, and all 3 parties escentially flop it. And all the while, folks get ready to have less money to hand out to everyone else who’s bills are going up. If our choices are going to be widdled down to the same, the same and the same, do I really need to know which one wins?

This has definitely been a year. Earlier this year, several municipalities held their own elections–including the Ottawa area. Then, not long after that wrapped up, the federal election. Which, it should probably be pointed out, was pretty much being squared off for during the municipal ones. And now, for the majority of the next couple weeks, several provinces are going through their own elections–including this one. And there’s been a common theme to most if not all of them, that I’ve noticed. With the exception of one or two issues of the week, you’ve got a choice of the same, the same, or the same, optionally with slightly differing levels of snore. In Ontario, the federal government run CBC has opted to broadcast the season opener for this year’s hockey go round instead of the results of the election in this here province. Because, hey, it just isn’t all that interesting this year. Hey, guys? That’s a hint. We’re kind of electioned out. Can we get back to running Ontario, and the rest of the country, now? That’d rock.

So you’ve probably heard mutterings in recent days about an organization going by the name Music Canada. You’d think they’re an advocacy group for Canadian musicians, wouldn’t you? In an alternate universe, you might be correct. In this one, though? Nope, it’s only the Canadian Recording Industry Asociation renaming itself. This post is just writing itself using bits and pieces of other posts. Like this one. And this one. And probably several others. Ah hell–let’s just chalk the whole thing up to different name, same organization, same good screwing. Cover all the bases? Yeah, I think so. Music Canada? How about no.

On May second, Canada went through its most recent election. Canada’s conservative party, which despite popular belief up here is far less conservative than the US conservative party, was elected to government. Fairly, insofar as a system can be fair without offending Quebec, elected in a majority of communities across Canada. In most cases, that would be enough to satisfy even the most politically active–democracy is democracy, win or lose, after all. Unless, apparently, you’re a former senate page named Brigette DePape–or Marcelle, as her press release identified her. Then, democracy is only democracy if the guy you voted for wins. And to prove we just weren’t democratic enough for her liking, during the throne speech to open this session of parliament, the senate page turned senate protester. Her reasoning? Well, after she was fired, she educated us.

Marcelle had served in the Senate as a page for nearly a year, but she decided to take action a few days ago because she said Harper doesn’t reflect the majority of Canadians.

“Harper’s agenda is disastrous for this country and for my generation,” Marcelle said.

She added that the government is “blowing billions of dollars” on fighter jets and corporate tax cuts, but ignoring important environmental issues like climate change.

But since Harper recently won a majority, Marcelle said that staging “creative” protests is the only way to fight back.

“I think that Harper’s agenda is so damaging that it called for something that is different,” she said. “I think we really need to take action.”

Ms. DePape continues, informing anyone who’ll listen that we could benefit from our very own version of the Arab spring. There’s a comment in here somewhere about just how ridiculous and, dare I say, out of step a call like that actually sounds in Canada of all places–you know, one of those places where people in the midst of their own Arab spring come to and enjoy the very thing she’s telling us to protest. I can’t put it into my own words. Instead, I’ll borrow from this opinion piece.

DePape called for a “Canadian version of an Arab Spring.” That’s right, we should all take to the streets and demand free and fair elections — you know, like the one we had on May 2. Now you’d think that a college student would know that we enjoy the freedom and system of government that thousands of Arabs are fighting, and dying, to achieve. But she somehow thinks that our first-past-the-post system invalidates the entire democratic process. I suppose we should expect contradictions like this from someone who professes to support democracy, but took a job in the unelected Senate.

Thanks for that, Jesse Kline. When asked what kind of people would support such a poor, misinformed soul, you need look no farther than the Public Service Alliance of Canada (PSAC), who was gracious enough to offer her a job. Oh, and Michael Moore–yeah, that Michael Moore. Maybe I’m the odd man out or something, but when Jack Layton, also known as Mr. “Harper Is Evil”, says himself what she did was wrong, that should say something.

This kid comes out of the University of Ottawa, lands herself a pretty nifty job for a university student while she’s attending, then turns around and does something like that. And all because the party she voted for wasn’t elected, so clearly there’s no democracy here. A little advice for Ms. DePape, not that she’d take it. What you’re protesting? Yeah, that thing over there? That’s what the Arab spring’s all about. Please, for the love of chese, do a little research before somebody protests the kind of education people are getting at Ottawa U these days.

We’ve officially been on some kind of a postal strike or something on this side of the border now for over a week. The strikes have been rotating, and they’re talking about making it a full on national strike if their demands for $millions aren’t met. They’ve already reduced delivery to 3 days a week due to the lack of actual business brought on by the strike. This whole event’s got me wondering something though. Does anyone who’s been affected by the strike actually miss getting the mail? I don’t mean the 95% of the mail that usually only goes with you as far as file 13 anyway. Is there anything you receive, either regularly or occasionally, that this strike has made more difficult? How about those of you who haven’t yet had the pleasure? If your city/town was to suffer a postal strike tomorrow, would it actually affect you? I’ll follow up later with my answer to that question, but if you’re bored, feel free to slap yours in the comments. And give the folks over at Canada Post some free advice while you’re at it–I get the impression both sides could use it.

Remember when you were always being nagged at to play by the rules or you’d wind up watching instead? Anyone? There are 10 girls on one local soccer team who won’t be getting that lesson–and 10 more who probably wouldn’t mind if they did. After using a player during the season who wasn’t listed on the team’s actual roster, the Louis Riel Rebelles were shocked to learn they’d been disqualified from the tournament that was taking place this week. So shocked were they, and so put out in disbelief that such things would actually be frowned on, the school took the league to court–and, surprise, had the decision overturned. The decision came down only a few hours before the tournament in Hamilton was to begin. The team they replaced? They got to find out after already sitting in Hamilton for the games. Ten grade school girls got to hear from their coach, “Thanks for coming out–oh, and by the way, you’re not playing today. The court said so.”. Fair play? Not in this league. So another group of kids gets to learn all about our definition of follow the rules, and they all lived judicially ever after. Way to go, Ontario.

So a new World Health Organization (WHO) study came out earlier this week potentially classifying your cell phone as a class 2B carcinogen. In other words, possibly carcinogenic. In simpler terms, potentially cancer-inducing. Yay. Go World Health Organization. In response to this, the 80 millionth study declaring such things (soon to follow: the 80 millionth study declaring the opposite), Ontario’s NDP would like to see warning labels indicating the things are potentially linked to cancer slapped on any and all cell phone by the manufacturer. And now, Ontario’s government is investigating the issue. For a little perspective, the Ontario NDP–and potentially our liberal government–is investigating the results of the World Health Organization’s having just potentially tossed cell phones into the same category as, we’ll say, coffee. Or pickles. And now it’s time for warning labels. Watch this space. Next month, beware of early morning caffination–it’ll kill you. Only in Ontario.

Until a couple days ago, I had no idea if you were a member of the RCMP, you were entitled to use stress as a defense against an assault charge–even if the assault charge was because you pounded on an innmate. Apparently, if you’re an RCMP officer in Alberta, that’s the defense that keeps you out of jail. An RCMP officer, after admitting he did a number on an innmate who’d already gotten whacked one in a bar fight, blames the stress of having been one of the officers called to the scene after the murders of 4 police officers.

Now, before folks jump all over me for being a cold and uncaring bastard, I get that it’s a mental kick in the teeth dealing with something like that. Obviously he worked with and was probably friends with those people, so yeah it’s going to be hard. I get that. But if you’re still bothered/stressed over that kinda thing, the absolute last place you should be is right back at work–particularly work wherein you’re dealing with other people. And the absolute last thing you should be doing is leaning on that as an excuse for having lost it and pounded the crap out of some shmuck you brought in on charges of his own. And yet, that’s precisely what this officer did, and then walked away from it.

Maybe I’m a nutter over here, but if average Joe who’d just been handed a craptacular week or two, complete with losing a family member, friend, coworker or whatever, haulled off and let some other average guy have it, he’d be sitting in jail right now for–oh–we’ll call it a year or two. This guy? Nope not so much. Six-month conditional sentence, 3 of which spent under house arrest. Barely a tap on the wrist–and still nowhere near the 6-9 months in jail that was asked for. And all because of stress. Guess it really does pay to be in law enforcement. Where do I sign up?

I have a thing for politics. Call it a hidden streak of sadism. Whichever. I’ve kept a relatively close eye on it since highschool. which, quite surprisingly, meant I got to play witness to nearly an average of one election every two years since shortly after I got out of college. In 2004, our majority liberal government under former crook–er I mean Prime Minister–Jean Chretien shrunk to a minority liberal government under former partner in crime–er I mean Prime Minister–Paul Martin. In 2006, we kept the minority but switched parties, and ended up with the conservatives and Stephen “accountability” Harper. In 2008, we landed the exact same government in the exact same position–huge thanks to Stephane “green shift” Dion. And in 2011, we get treated to another one with the help of Michael “No coalition, maybe” Ignatieff. I’m not even bothering to comment on the role Jack “your money for everyone” Layton or that member of provincial parliament from Quebec played in any or all of them, simply because, well, nobody but they really care about it.

I voted in the 2004 election. I even voted in the 2006 election. When 2008 rolled around and we went for a third straight vote in 4 years, I didn’t bother. The platforms were the same. Most of the major players were the same. My local representative remained the same–mostly because the alternatives to him remained pretty much the same. And truth be told, I’d much rathered be at work than standing in line for an hour and not getting paid for it. I will not be voting in 2011. Why? See my reasoning for 2008, minus the whole being at work thing. It’s been 3 years since the last election, and for the better part of 2 of them, they’ve been talking about the next one. Hi, really really old Michael Ignatieff quote. Nice to see you. And of course, surprise of surprises–here we are again. I can has stability plz? No, somehow, I didn’t think so.

After the opening festivities of the olympics last year, my take on which can be found in its asociated category, the Quebec language police were up in arms because almost no french was actually used in the event. Neverminding the fact that if it had been, it would have gone pretty well not very understood by the majority of people actually there. That was around this time last year. Here it is February 2011, and wouldn’t you know, they’re still at it. And once again, they’re ignoring the fact that the rest of the world, with the exception of Quebec, pretty much speaks english and some other language that isn’t french. And that’s assuming they speak more than one language at all. Personally, I rather enjoyed the fact I could actually understand most of what went on at a Canadian event for a change.

Okay, I get it–everything that may remotely involve Quebec must be completely bilingual, french first, and must shine a light on just how wonderful and glorious Quebec is. Yes, even if it’s a factual account of Canadian history–can’t have Quebec coming out like the spunge it is, after all. But really, now. This was 2010 when it happened. And it was one evening. That Quebec is still to this day going on about it, I think, says more about Quebec than the events they’re complaining about. Thankfully I’m no longer surprised the ones doing the complaining are the pro-Quebec, anti-Canada political parties currently in opposition in Quebec’s “national” legislature. But still, you’d think they’d glom onto an issue to beat dead that’s a little newer than this. After all, regardless to who’s side holds the more truth, if any of them actually do, you can’t undo the cerimony. It still happened the way it happened. And hey look, Quebec would still be complaining about it. And the rest of Canada’s tax dollars are paying for the complaint. Only in backwards Quebec.

I’m not one for capped internet connections. Never have been. Not even if I’m only checking email. I took full advantage of one ISP on my way out for reasons of capped bandwidth/traffick shaping policies–that they’re still continuing with, last I’d heard. I ripped into another for offering its own customers an on-demand streaming service a la Netflix and deciding hey, our internet customers don’t actually need a reason to use our service over torrents, so we’ll just count it against their bandwidth cap. I went at them again, this time for lowering their already ridiculously low caps in response to the launch of the offending Netflix in Canada. At the time, while none of the big 3 ISP’s (Rogers, Bell and Telus) were offering unlimitted internet services, the smaller ISP’s TekSavvy, Primus) were. And life was great. I ditched Bell for TekSavvy, who I ended up leaving for other reasons over 2 and a half years later–but that’s been beaten to death over here already, and avoided both issues. Bell decided not long after that that they didn’t much like us playing that game. So they wined to the CRTC. As did Rogers, as did Telus. Because, you know, competitive advantage in Canada just shouldn’t be allowed to exist. This past week, the CRTC agreed. Now, as of February first, even the smaller ISP’s are mandated to piss off their customers by charging them for any and all usage that takes you beyond 25 GB. After 25 GB, your options are to pay $x for every gig over that amount, or pay another price–usually only slightly less–for blocks of bandwidth, some companies (hello, TekSavvy) are calling it insurance, that you may or may not actually end up using for a month–more than likely, you’ll end up using.

As a general guide, let me let you in on a little hint as to just how ridiculously tiny 25 GB is. If you’re into the whole online gaming thing, even if it’s just one of those games you find on Facebook to kill half an hour on your coffee break, you can blow through 25 gigs easily in a month. If you’re doing anything more demanding than that, for example playing World of Warcraft, even if it’s not for very long at a stretch, 25 gigs goes by pretty quick. Get a lot of email? Use a fair bit of Twitter? Decide you want to install your favourite OS on a spare computer? Or virtually? Do pretty much anything that isn’t your typical half-hour of internet usage a day for checking email/paying bills? Your 25 gig cap waves goodbye in an aweful goddamn hurry. Yep, you guessed it. Youtube, streaming music, random TWAudio or Q-audio things, they hurt too. And don’t even get me started on what any even moderate amount of file sharing of any kind, legal or otherwise, does to the bandwidth cap–which would be the entire reason for the cap in the first place.

The major players in the Canadian market have been calling the shots pretty much since the advent of the CRTC and the granting of regulatory authority to the CRTC over our portion of the internet. Bell, Rogers, Telus all started throttling traffick, manipulating things in such a way that traffick that fell into specific categories was slowed or otherwise given headaches–we call that throttling, or traffick shaping. The big push from the smaller ISP’s at that time was “we’d never do that to you!”. And, ironically, they were right–they usually never did. So shortly before I officially was to switch ISP’s from Bell to Teksavvy, Bell thought they’d extend a favour to the smaller ISP’s, and do the traffick shaping for them. Nice, no? Naturally, the CRTC was perfectly fine with it–prompting at least two complaints and a petition that didn’t actually end up getting a whole lot of anywhere. And voila, one third-party throttle, served monopolistically. It’s been that way escentially since. Same with the newest issue of usage-based billing.

Bell and Rogers began instituting, and later lowering–hence those first few links at the top of the entry–bandwidth caps. They started out mildly reasonable and didn’t hang around there long. Instead, prices went up, bandwidth went down, and–at least on DSL–speeds escentially stayed the same. Suddenly, we weren’t getting what we’d call our money’s worth. Once again, up comes the smaller ISP, this time with an unlimitted bandwidth offering and a promise of “We wouldn’t do that to you!”. And, once again, they’re usually right–they, specifically, wouldn’t do that to their customers. And once again, Bell, Rogers and Telus, who the smaller ISP’s have little to no choice but deal with if they want to be able to offer internet service, volunteered to do them the favour of instituting bandwidth caps for them. And once again, they did it with the complete backing of the CRTC–poof, usage-based billing is born, the unlimitted internet is dead. As before, there’s a mass amount of appeals underway to try and convince the CRTC to see reason, but so far, it hasn’t done much but take up space in the news. And once again, the CRTC is stuck in 1995 or 2000, in the land of the barely above 56k. And just like that, like the land of barely above 56k, the CRTC snaps its fingers and unlimitted internet no longer exists. Now if we could just see *improvements* to our internet services come through as quickly as hinderences. Well, can’t have everything. At least someone’s seeing some quick progress.

Carin over at the Vomit Comet already laid good into Canada Post for this one, but since I’m procrastinating with this whole packing thing anyway and a little backup never hurt anyone, they get a friendly little reminder from me.

In December, I decided I had 30 seconds between the other 80 million things I was trying to get done that last week or two before Christmas to actually fire off some cards to family and a couple friends. You’d think an effort that’d take a grand total of 30 seconds, right? Last year, yes. The year before, definitely. This year? Yeah, no. What should have taken 30 seconds instead turned into a moment of temporary oh shit.

As part of their move to supposedly “improve the customer service experience”, Canada post had at some point late last year decided it might be fun to go all touchscreen, all the time. Their reason for doing so? It’s a requirement to deal with the new chip-equipped debbit cards. Much like Carin in her experience, postal chick and I went a round or two over that one. Not only could they have easily gone with another, more accessible model, but–in my case in particular–the unit I was staring at was stuck to the counter, which was roughly chest height for me (I’m 5’11 or so). Which meant, in simple terms, not only could the blind/low vision not do anything whatsoever with it, but lord help anyone who came rolling on up in a wheelchair. I’d of loved to see just how the local post office was going to handle that one. They weren’t doing a whole lot to handle this one, in any event.

Lucky for me, as you quite literally can’t get to 90% of what’s available in this town without wheels, I just so happened to have a pair of eyes handy. Equally lucky for me, they’re eyes I actually don’t mind knowing my PIN–hey, sometimes stuff has to get done and I’m busy. But I’d of been in much the same boat Carin was otherwise. And the explanation of such to the postal employee? Prompted the much anticipated and not at all favourable–for her–standard responses of, “You’ll just have to make sure you bring someone with you, I guess.”, and, “Well, there’s an ATM not far from here. We still accept cash.”.

As if she didn’t probably already figure she maybe shouldn’t have said that–I probably should give her a tiny benefit of doubt, here–she got a good dose of education from both myself, and my wheels. There was no actual reply, and we went on business as usual.

On my return home, I’d put together a little something and sent it via Canada Post’s less than well-organized website into, what I’m going to guess, is their customer feedback black hole. As of yet I haven’t heard or seen anything resembling a response, and when the roommate and I went to fill out a money order for the apartment that wasn’t (more on that in another entry, if I remember), things hadn’t changed. Of course, anyone who’s done this dance knows exactly what comes next–a longer letter. Which will more than likely get dropped on someone once I touch down in Rochester. And hey, this time, I’ll have a month to go find regulations with which to beat postal people around a bit. One would suspect I had too much fun doing this. And yeah, they’d be right.

The moral of the story? for the love of cheese, get with the accessibility program already. You’re a federal agency, bound by federal laws. This includes federal accessibility laws–which, I’ll admit, the actual government’s having a hell of a time following but that issue’s already been beaten to death on every blog but this one. Get your shit in order. Or, hell, better yet, hire me and Carin–we’ll do it for you. I expect this from the private sector–rant on that coming probably when I hit Rochester. After all, they don’t make much money off us blind folks. But really? Canada Post? They don’t make much money, period. Let’s half some equal playing field up in here, and maybe they’ll make a little more. In the meantimie, where’d I put my regulations?

Just when we thought Canadian content couldn’t suck any more than it did with Corner Gas, we get a special treat. From the folks who brought you that steaming pile comes this attempt at comedy.

Shooting begins in July on InSecurity, a 13-part “action comedy” about bumbling Canadian spies, producers said in Regina.

The series stars include relative newcomer Natalie Lisinska as a rookie agent; William deVry, from the soap opera The Bold and the Beautiful, as her boss; and well-known Quebec actor Remy Girard as a jaded veteran.

I accidentally saw a trailer for the show on Sunday night, and almost immediately wanted to change the channel. That’s after the preview–I’m scared to watch the show. Folks, I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again. If we didn’t have Canadian content laws in place, people up here would actually be inclined to create a show on par with a CSI, or hell, even a Simpsons. Here’s the problem, though. Most Canadian shows, well, suck. Yes, I’m looking at you, Little Mosque On The Prairie. But even if they suck, the CRTC says they have to be played. So Corner Gas, Little Mosque, and now this sad attempt at something vaguely resembling a TV show get air time. And hey look, they all get plenty of airtime on CBC–no wonder I only watch that channel for Hockey Night in Canada.

We lose the Can Con laws, we get decent TV shows, kids. Keep the laws, we get crap–and it still gets airtime. Seems like a simple enough choice to me. So why have no Canadian governments dared bring up such sacreligiousness? Good question. Any political types care to weigh in with an explanation? Inquiring minds kind of wouldn’t mind knowing.

If you live in Ottawa or the valley, you’ve seen craptastical weather. Below freezing, and there’s crap of various types falling from the sky–some of it, from what I’ve been hearing, coming down white. For the record, no, winter didn’t start a month early–though some days, you may wonder. This is what I like to call the winter warm-up.

Just a bit ago, we were treated to a very impressive 20 minutes of freezing rain in Pembroke. I got to run outside with a couple dogs for the tail end of it–lucky, lucky me. And then, just to screw with us, Environment Canada has decided hey, tomorrow we get to see April-style weather. Bright side: minimal actual preparation before going outside. Not so bright side: consistency, let’s have some.

Yeah, you guessed it. I got nothin’. So have a random local weather related blog post instead. More content tomorrow. Or not.

It’s a standard practice, at least up here in the great white north, that the winner(s) of a provincial or federal lottery have some pretty basic info belonging to them attached to a lottery advertisement after they’ve won–usually their name, city of residense and a photo or something. The daughter of a robbery victim who recently won the lottery is blaming that advertising for the fact she was robbed, even though she’s admitted it’s very likely the victim knew her attackers, seeing as they demanded she hand over a very specific bracelet belonging to her as well as money. She’s since asked Loto-Quebec to stop including the victim’s info in their announcements/advertisements. Which prompted the linked article, which in turn includes everything the advertisement had except, presumedly, the victim’s photo–not being able to see the screen makes it kind of difficult to confirm that assumption. If her solution to her mother’s being robbed was to demand Loto-Quebec pull the advertisement(s) that included her information, will the daughter then ask the same of CBC? Inquiring minds want to know.

Drop the puck, and the gloves. Better than the world series–and only because Toronto hasn’t been there since 93, it’s all about that other major sport they do down there. Yeah, that one. If you’re a CBC fan, it’s about to be taken over by Toronto versus Montreal for the hundred thousandth time since the dawn of HNIC. If we do better than last year, I’ll be extatic. If we make the playoffs, I’ll be through the roof. If we make it to the finals, I’ll be just about in orbit. And if I can remember the number to my pizza joint of choice, I’ll be satisfied–at least for tonight. Hockey is here, folks. And I’ll be putting my team’s entries over here for the curious–it even has its own RSS feed. Now this is how a Canadian winter should be spent. To get you in the mood, have a video, courtesy Toronto’s last preseason game. We’ll call it practice for Montreal tonight.

This would have solved my employment issues ages ago. A law professor at the university of windsor, Emily Carasco, has launched a discrimination claim against the university for not appointing her Dean of law. And while the claim is still being heard, the human rights tribunal of Ontario has decided to come out and state rather clearly it has the authority to remove the current Dean and appoint her in place should her claim be successful.

Apparently, she and another candidate were rejected, thus prompting a new search. She’s insisting a colleague of hers sabotaged her efforts to actually gain the position.

The Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario says it has the power to both remove and appoint university deans, according to a new ruling in the case of a woman who claims racism and sexism were behind her rejection as Dean of Law at the University of Windsor.

Professor Emily Carasco alleges a colleague “sabotaged” her candidacy last spring by raising historical allegations of plagiarism with the search committee, and as part of her human rights complaint, she asked the tribunal to over-rule the school and appoint her dean.

And sure enough, according to the article, our lovely human rights tribunals do have that power.

This surprising power derives from the section of the Ontario Human Rights Code that empowers the tribunal to make “an order directing any party to the application to do anything that, in the opinion of the tribunal, the party ought to do to promote compliance with this Act.”

Although it is relatively common in labour relations law for successful complainants to be restored to their rightful jobs, even if they have since been filled, there is no precedent for such a high-level job being dictated by a human rights tribunal, and academic freedom would surely figure prominently in arguments over such an order.

“Anything”, in this case, could potentially include handing over a position to someone whom the university has, for whatever reason, determined doesn’t actually meet the qualifications–or is otherwise unsuitable. I wouldn’t begrudge Emily her day in court–even if I don’t agree this case should have gotten this far, but it kinda makes me think. If all that stands between you and a well-paying job is a discrimination claim, neverminding whether or not the people doing the hiring think you qualified enough for the job in the first place, my employment fortunes may just complete a 180-degree turn. To hell with that other guy’s half dozen more years of experience than me–I’m disabled, and therefore I’m entitled to that job. Yeah, now tell me Canada’s human rights codes haven’t gone out to lunch.