Posted by Don McLenaghen on April 18, 2014
Download the episode here!
Whine of the Week : Killing the CBC
As ye sow, so shall ye reap…can also be stated, as ye fast, so shall ye whither, and whither the CBC has. Facing an $100 million budget short fall…thanks to Harper, losing hockey and other factors…the CBC is cutting staff by over 650.
Polling shows the CBC is the most trusted media source in the country, more three-quarters think the government should fund the CBC at a sufficient level…most of those think funding needs to increased.
The Harper government has regularly and consistently slashed the CBC grant budget after budget while spending the entire CBC budget on a single F-35 jet…or overpriced frigates. What money they are giving, they think would be better spent by just giving it to private media companies…here’s how that would turn out…
Why are we not moving to a BBC style of funding…create a strong, stable and independent broadcaster, whose sole interest to provide the best of Canada.
Seriously the Unfair Elections Act is Important
How did Poilievre become Minister for Democratic Reform, how was the act craft and again…how it can destroy democracy in Canada – The Harper fix is in!
Find out more:
The IPCC’s Fifth Assessment Report
Climate Change…even more certainty and dire warnings, again – The IPCC released it latest report on the state of the worlds climate and we’re serious screwed!
Conclusions of the WG1 report (The Physical Science Basis) are summarized below:
- “Warming of the climate system is unequivocal, and since the 1950s, many of the observed changes are unprecedented over decades to millennia”.
- “Atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrous oxide have increased to levels unprecedented in at least the last 800,000 years”.
- Human influence on the climate system is clear. It is extremely likely (95-100% probability) that human influence was the dominant cause of global warming between 1951-2010.
- “Continued emissions of greenhouse gases will cause further [global] warming and changes in all components of the climate system. Limiting climate change will require substantial and sustained reductions of greenhouse gas emissions”.
- “Most aspects of climate change will persist for many centuries even if emissions of CO2 are stopped”
Conclusions of the WG3 report (Mitigation of Climate Change) are summarized below:
- The global surface temperature increase by the end of the 21st century is likely to exceed 1.5 °C relative to the 1850 to 1900 period for most scenarios, and is likely to exceed 2.0 °C for many scenarios. With the possibility of an increase as much as 4.5°C
- The global water cycle will change, with increases in disparity between wet and dry regions, as well as wet and dry seasons, with some regional exceptions.
- The oceans will continue to warm, with heat extending to the deep ocean, affecting circulation patterns.
- Decreases are very likely in Arctic sea ice cover, Northern Hemisphere spring snow cover, and global glacier volume
- Global mean sea level will continue to rise at a rate very likely to exceed the rate of the past four decades
- Changes in climate will cause an increase in the rate of CO2 production.
- Increased uptake by the oceans will increase the acidification of the oceans.
- Future surface temperatures will be largely determined by cumulative CO2, which means climate change will continue even if CO2 emissions are stopped.
Find out more:
Society Is Doomed
NASA funded study shows the not only do civilizations collapse, it happens regularly and is inevitable…but there is an upside.
Find out more:
Posted in Blogs, Show notes | Tagged: apocalypse, BBC, broadcast media, Canadian Crown Jewels, Canadian Culture, Canadian identity, CBC, Climate Change, Collapse, corporate agenda, democracy, Democratic Reform, Doom, Elections Canada, fair elections act, Harper agenda, Harry Neufeld, India, Indus River, IPCC, Linda Frum, Mark Maynard, NASA, Pakistan, Pierre Poilievre, Preston Manning, The Harper fix, water war | 1 Comment »
Posted by Don McLenaghen on June 19, 2012
– Chinese rockets,
– Neanderthal painters,
– The crime of atheism,
– Reproductive music,
– The poor and working poor (Part 2 of 2 interview with Iglika Ivanova)
Download the episode here!
Topics: China’s rockets
China launched a manned mission Shenzhou 9 to their orbiting space station Tiangong 1. We talk about the future of China’s space program.Find out more:
Resent research pushed back the date of the earliest cave art to about 41,000 years old. The new twist is homo-sapiens were thought to be the only species to create cave art but humans were not suppose to have arrived in the region until 35,000 years ago. Some people are now speculating that Neanderthals may have been the artist.Find out more:
The crime of being an atheist
An atheist in Indonesia has been sentence to 10 years on jail for professing his atheism. A Kuwaiti man faces 10 years of hard labour in prison and feel lucky he avoided a potential death sentence for blasphemy. We discuss the criminalization of atheist around the world, the need to be vigilant and globally supportive. Find out more:
Reproductive music Research has shown the obvious that sex sells but how it manifest itself in different genre of music and the dubious link to evolutionary advantage make it an interesting topic for the show. Find out more:
The poor and working poor
Don’s sits down with Iglika Ivanova in the Radio Free Thinker virtual studio and discusses poverty and Living wage. Iglika Ivanova is a research economist at the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives for BC. Find out more:
Walk for Peace
This year marks the 30th anniversary of the Walk for Peace march. In 1982, 35,000 people marched from Kitsilano to the West End calling for world peace. By 1984, the march had grown to 100,000 people. Keeping with the Humanist commitment to global peace, BC Humanist Association invites you to join them in the walk to help raise their banner and the humanist commitment to peace, respect and a civil society
When: Saturday, June 30 at Noon Where: Sunset Beach or meet up at the Sunset Grill around 11:50 am Cost: Free
Humanist Brunch for Peace?
The BC Humanist Association doesn’t want to you walk on empty stomachs, so before the march, they are planning to meet at the Sunset Grill for brunch at 10:00 am. Afterward, they will join the march which departs at noon and wraps up at 2pm at Sunset Beach for entertainment, music, and celebration.
Please RSVP if you plan to join them for brunch (so they can confirm our reservation) RSVPs close on Wednesday, June 27th.
When: Saturday, June 30 at 10:00 am Where: Sunset Grill (Yew and York Street) Cost: Whatever you order off the menu
Aan’s Legal Defence Fund
Atheist Alliance International has launched an appeal for donations to help pay for Aan’s legal costs and to support the Aan family’s living expenses while he is in jail.
CFI Transnational wants to make the voices of those who support Alexander loud and clear to the Indonesian government. The Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) is organizing a letter-writing campaign on Alexander’s behalf, and CFI urges you to take part. They have created a custom letter which you can sign or add to and add your voice to those fighting for Aan’s freedom.
Please support Atheist around the world in their struggle against persecution by donating here.
Posted in Show notes | Tagged: Atheism, blasphemy laws, cave art, China, Evolution, guaranteed annual income, India, Indonesia, Kuwait, living wage, Mincome, minimum wage, music, national food strategy, Neanderthal, Pakistan, palaeolithic, Poverty, poverty strategy, reproduction, rocket, Sex, space exploration, space station | Leave a Comment »
Posted by Don McLenaghen on May 1, 2011
First the formation of a government….
After an election, the Governor General asks the leader of the party with the largest number of seats if he(/she?) believes they can secure the confidence of the parliament. Obviously in a majority situation it’s a given; however in a minority situation some negotiation may need to take place before a positive answer can be given. When the ‘major’ party believes it cannot gain this confidence, the GG will then give the ‘runner-ups’ an opportunity to meet the standard of confidence. The Confidence of the house is simply the majority of MP’s supporting government either directly in a non-confidence vote (ie. The majority reject this motion) or indirectly by the failure to pass the budget, however the recent government (not uniquely but more frequently) have declared other bill-votes to be votes of confidence in an attempt to browbeat the opposition so as to pass said legislation.
What is the difference between minority and coalition government?
A minority government is one where a party forms a government while not having a majority in parliament but maintaining the confidence of the majority of MPs in parliament. We have a long history of minority governments with the first occurring in 1873 and twice the ruling party changed without an election (1873: Conservative to Liberal and 1926: Liberal to Conservative). There are two kinds of minority rule – arrogant or cooperative.
The Arrogant minorities tend to have a short life span as we have seen with Arthur Meighen (who lasted about 6 months) or Diefenbaker (who lasted less than 5 months). This form attempts to implement their party platform irrespective of what the majority of parliament wishes, where they attempt to balance the opposition’s aversion for another election against aversion of the government’s legislation. In this way, Harper has proven quite adept; manipulating the electoral fears of the opposition so as to pass far more regressive conservative (neo-con?) legislation that one would think possible. Of course his domineering control of the conservative party, his totalitarian control of the ‘media message’ (helped by the absence of a pluralistic press) and his contempt for parliament (for which the government ultimately fell) and the democratic processes has helped him push his extremist agenda…sorry, for the rant however true it may be.
The Cooperative minority is one that acknowledges the opinion of the nation is mixed…that it likes policies from some most/all the parties and a responsible Prime Minister should attempt to push legislation that is supported by the majority of the population regardless of the originating party. The greatest of these PM’s probably was Lester Pearson during whose tenure as PM we saw the adoption of such great advances the current Canadian Flag, the creation of universal Health Care, Canadian Student Loans and Canada Pension Plan.
A Coalition government is one where two or more parties form a government which can maintain the confidence of the majority of MPs in parliament. Canada has never had a coalition government (although during WWI, some liberal members joined the Borden Government however, the Liberal party officially declined the offer of coalition). As of yet Finland has never had a majority government, Israel, India and Germany regularly rely on coalitions and currently England has a coalition government.
Recent claims by the Conservatives that the Liberals-NDP planned to form a coalition government WITH the Bloc is incorrect (a lie?). The coalition was comprised of the Liberals (who would get 18 ministries) and the NDP (who would get 6 ministries); the Bloc only offered support so that when the Lib-NDP leadership approached the GG they had a credible claim to have the confidence of the house. By this standard, the Bloc was in a coalition with Harper’s Conservatives government.
Do we elect our Prime Minister?
Yes and no…technically the Prime Minister is simply the leader of the house…the leader of the house is simple any individual who can command the confidence of the house. The office of Prime Minister is not defined in our Constitution; in fact the PM is only referenced indirectly as the person responsible for organising Constitutional Conferences (to amend the constitution). Unlike our American neighbours whose presidential powers are explicitly outlined, we rely on history and precedent to define the PM’s powers and role (there is also a large degree the willingness or acquiescence of the public/parliament to accept changes for example the recent decision of to officially refer to government projects not as “the Canadian government” but as “the Harper government”…something I find very disturbing and wrong but something that seems to disappear for the headlines due to other Conservative scandals.
In fact all ministers and their portfolios of responsibility are defined by constitutional convention or the whim of the PM themselves. By convention, the leader of the party that holds the confidence of parliament is the PM; usually this is a member of the House of Commons but on occasion are not (John Abbot and Mackenzie Bowell were senators while PM). As well; on several occasions’ ministers of the crown were not elected members of government at all, although this is seen as extreme and against convention. On occasion, governments have had ministers of the crown who only later became MPs and often senators have been ministers with portfolio.
The PM serves “At her majesties pleasure”, meaning that unless a PM resigns, dies or is dismissed by the GG (or Queen), they remain PM even if they or their party loses an election. If a PM party loses a majority, they may still remain PM if they can command the confidence of the house. They may also be dismissed by the GG who will then ask the leader of the majority party (or the leader who can command the confidence of the house) to form the government.
Why are elections called?
An election is called by three mechanisms; firstly in our constitution a government cannot hold power longer than 5 years before an election MUST be called. As well as the Canada Elections Act (CEA) states that a general election is to take place on the third Monday in October, in the fourth calendar year after the previous poll, starting with October 19, 2009. The CEA however can be amended at any time so has little effective weight as our current election shows.
Under parliamentary rules, the prime minister can ask the Governor General to dissolve Parliament but the Governor General can refuse the request. This precedent was set in 1926 when William Lyon McKenzie asked the GG to dissolve the parliament but Lord Byng refused and gave the Conservatives a chance. When Paul Martin was in a minority situation after the 2004 election, Harper drafted an agreement between the opposition parties (including the Bloc) to approach the GG to form a government. In 2008, the shoe was on the other foot and the NDP and Liberals signed an agreement to form a coalition; this was avoided by the unusual act of prorogation of parliament.
For those who do not know, prorogation is ending one session of parliament and starting a new one without calling an election traditionally done to allow MP’s to engage their constituency. In modern times, the length of the first ‘session’ of parliament is around 6 months to a year. Harper has the record for the both the shortest session, 17 days, and also the earliest call for Prorogation after an election… 51 days.
Lastly, an election is triggered whenever the sitting government loses the confidence of the parliament. As mentioned before, this can occur by a direct motion of non-confidence or the failure to pass a moneyed bill (such as the budget). Technically, any bill can be declared a confidence vote by the sitting government, but only a motion of non-confidence can be moved by the opposition to defeat a sitting government. It is interesting to note that a third motion may become an automatic non-confidence motion resulting in the defeat of the government; that is a motion of contempt of parliament. Technically that was the motion that caused the Harper government to dissolve parliament and request the GG to call for an election. In the future it may become constitution convention that to be found in contempt of parliament is to also be fired as government…as so it should be.
 I have excluded session a) 1873 which was only to call an election, b) only enacted the War Measures Act in 1914 c) the declaration of war on Germany in 1939, and d) 1930 for no good reason at all!
Posted in Blogs, Don's Blogs | Tagged: Arthur Meighen, Canada Elections Act, Canada Pension Plan, Canadian Election 2011, Canadian Flag, Canadian government, Canadian Student Loans, Coalition government, confidence of the parliament, Conservative Party, Conservative scandal, Constitutional Act 1982, Constitutional Conferences, contempt of parliament, England, Finland, Germany, Government, Governor General, Harper government, India, Israel, Jack Layton, John Abbot, John Diefenbaker, Lester Pearson, Liberal Party, Lord Byng, Mackenzie Bowell, NDP, New Democratic Party, non-confidence vote, parliament, Paul Martin, prime minister, Prorogation, Steven Harper, the Bloc, universal Health Care, William Lyon McKenzie | Leave a Comment »