Sunday, February 22, 2015


So yesterday I got into an argument about who was responsible for the tragedy of two children dying while adults squabbled:
While the house burned early Tuesday, the truck sat in the snow outside the home of the band’s mechanic. The volunteer fire department in nearby Loon Lake didn’t respond, because service to the reserve was cut weeks earlier over unpaid bills.
The discussion was about who had the greater responsibility for the deaths, the band which didn't pay its bills or train its own firefighters, or the Loon Lake volunteer fire department who went back to sleep when called out to the fire.
I don't know the answer. But I do know that somebody has to be the adult here -- maybe the provincial government rural municipality department, maybe the FSIN, somebody -- to step up when relationships between bands and nearby towns deteriorate.
“The bottom line is: Two children died and the adults have to sort it out,” Bob Pringle, Saskatchewan’s children’s advocate, said in an interview Thursday. “It clearly has to stop and it’s not going to stop unless we do something differently.”
But doesn't it always seems that somebody has to die before we are willing to do things differently?

Wednesday, February 11, 2015

Brer Justin

Canada's commentariat is going crazy over what a VERY BAD decision Justin Trudeau has made in welcoming Eve Adams to the party.
But it wasn't Adams that Trudeau wanted, it was Dimitri Soudas. The commentariat is also deriding this choice, but Soudas will frighten the Harper Cons the way no mere MP ever could. As John Ivison put it:
He knows where the bodies are buried because he buried many of them himself.
Trudeau is crazy like a fox...

Saturday, February 07, 2015

Duffster puff

I know everyone is hyping the Duffy trial, but I think its likely going to be a big pile of nothing.
For the life of me, I cannot see how Harper will be tainted by this. Basically, Harper and his aides can argue that they did the right thing for Canadians by firing Duffy and Wallin as soon as their misdeeds were revealed.
Yes, of course, it makes no sense at all:
Defence lawyer Donald Bayne made much of the fact Mr. Duffy is charged with bribery in connection with the $90,000 he received from Mr. Wright, while the former Harper aide was not charged for providing the money.
“I am sure that I am not the only Canadian who will now wonder openly how what was not a crime or a bribe when Nigel Wright paid it on his own initiative became, however, mysteriously, a crime or bribe when received by Senator Duffy,” the lawyer said. “The evidence will show that Senator Duffy did not want to participate in Nigel Wright’s and the PMO’s repayment scenario, which they concocted for purely political purposes.”
But conveniently, Wright isn't on trial for anything.
So whether Harper knew or approved the payment in advance is not actually relevant to Duffy receiving it.
Given the long reach of the Harper PMO, there is no reason why anybody would want to testify to this effect except maybe Duffy himself -- and he would have done the Big Reveal already if he had had any evidence.