http://www.nowtoronto.com/lifestyle/ecoholic.cfm?content=161917

2008/02/27

The ultimate guide to a green revolution in eight easy moves

You fret about greening your world, but let’s face it, by “world” you mostly mean your home, your body and whatever’s 10 feet from your face. All this greening stuff can be so “me, me, me.” Time to take our navels right out of the equation and ratchet up our place in the public arena, engage our communities and stand up for real change. (Hey, Obama stole that from us.)

But this doesn’t have to be all picket signs and tree chainings. Get creative. Use the skills Gaia gave you to sketch, sing, streak your homegrown brand of protest. While you dream those up, here’s a personal primer on how to harness your inner eco rebel – from baby steps to hardcore leaps.

1. Peeved about landfill-clogging packaging?

SOFTCORE: Don’t keep it bottled up. Talk to your local grocery manager and fave takeout joint about bringing in biodegradable packaging (shoot, you can even point them to Greenshift.ca for products), and don’t forget to bring your own reusable food containers to the bulk section, food court and fast food joints.

HARDCORE: Just like people do with corn husks in Chinatown, dump your packaging at the store it came from (like that hard, clear, unopenable crap around razors or the styrofoam that comes with electronics). And be sure to tell the store manager why you’re doing it . You can also mail it to the provincial or federal enviro minister (telling them both you want regs that push producers to take responsibility for this stuff for a change) using Sierra Club’s stickers (http://ontario.sierraclub.ca).

2. Choked up about the fact that the government won’t cough up real action on greenhouse gases?

SOFTCORE: So cars and light trucks spew 10 per cent of Canada’s greenhouse gas emissions. We have till March 15 (when public comment period ends) to tell the PM to embrace California emissions standards , so call the PMO’s office and leave a snippet of Joni Mitchell’s California on his answering machine (613-941-6901).

HARDCORE: God, even Imperial Oil thinks it’s time for a moratorium on tar sands development. Organize a call-in to Alberta premier Ed Stelmach (780-427 2251) of family, friends and co-workers; tell him, “It’s time for a time out on the tar sands.” For more ideas, see www.tarsandstimeout.ca.

3. Tired of waiting for bike lanes that never show?

Photo by Eithan Eisenberg

SOFTCORE: Send a message to the city and drivers by hogging a whole car lane when you ride. This works especially well when there’s more than one of you. And if you hang our Honk If You Love Bike Lanes sign (see online) on your fender, you can give the thumbs-up to anyone who blares the horn at you.

HARDCORE: Why wait for the city? Next time the streets are clear and dry, paint your own bike lane, like the Other Urban Repair Squad did last fall (www.urbanrepairs.blogspot.com). Or sign up for the group’s next guerrilla bike lane session.

4. Tripped out over toxins leaching from your water bottle and mystery carcinogens lurking in, well, nearly everything?

SOFTCORE: Stop the chemical bath! Mail that #7 water bottle, squishy PVC toy or non-stick muffin tin to Enviro Minister John Baird and tell him if he doesn’t ban persistent toxins like bisphenol A, phthalates and PFOA, he can stick the ducky where the sun don’t shine. And remember, postage to an MP is free!

HARDCORE: If the province won’t implement Community Right to Know labelling laws, as it came oh-so-close to doing in 07 (laws on California’s books since the 80s), just walk into your local drugstore or hardware store and slap your own warnings on dodgy products like hair dye, Teflon pans, baby bottles and nail polishes (that don’t say they’re toluene-free). Just print our nifty “Warning: this product contains a carcinogen and/or hormone disrupter” labels (available oline) on sticker paper and go to town!

5. Idling driving you crazy?

SOFTCORE: Okay, so our idling bylaw doesn’t apply on really cold days, but when it warms up a little, knock on car windows and, with a smile (so you don’t get socked), hand the offending motorist a friendly educational flyer (in fact, we’ve designed one for you, available online).

HARDCORE: Snap photos of idling government and corporate vehicles in action and send your pics, along with a letter of complaint, to the drivers’ bosses, telling them they need to green their idling policies. Trust us, this gets results.

6. Baffled by the boreal being flushed down the toilet?

SOFTCORE: Mail your Sears catalogue back to head office and tell them until they stop printing on old-growth paper, you’ll never buy a thing from them again.

HARDCORE: I’d tell you to toilet-paper Queen’s Park, but that would just be wasteful. Instead grab a brave pal, plus a friend with a ladder and do a little QP tree-sitting à la Julia Butterfly Hill. A toilet-paper-strewn banner that reads “Stop flushing the boreal down the toilet, Minister Cansfield” should make your point. Oh and be sure to call the press once you’re sky high.

7. Worried about polluters in your ’hood?

SOFTCORE: Take snapshots of suspicious sites and help build Toronto Environmental Alliance’s secret toxins map at Secrecyistoxic.ca.

HARDCORE: Start a green neighbourhood watch (check out our window decals online). If we’re going to look out for our kids’ safety, we should also protect their right to clean air, water and more. A green neighbourhood watch could encourage locals to note illegal tree cutting, retail and industrial pollution, idling cars, etc. Scared to confront your neighbours face to face? Leave a helpful info-filled leaflet in the offender’s mailbox.

8. Nervous about the province’s $40 billion nuclear expansion?

SOFTCORE: If McGuinty really wants more nukes, make him stand by his radioactive legacy – help get the Darlington reactor renamed after the premier! It’s easy, just sign the petition at ILoveNukes.ca and pass it on.

HARDCORE: Take inspiration from the kings of demo theatrics, Greenpeace, who dumped a barrel of mock nuke waste on the preem, and do your own radioactive drama. Or grab a few friends and march to QP wearing twirly propeller hats and signs that say “Go wind or go home” and “Grow the green grid.”

http://www.nowtoronto.com/lifestyle/story.cfm?content=161914

Eco movement sparks global makeover

Welcome to the holy shit club.

You might want to scoot over, because there are a lot of us here. We may not wear green name tags, but if you ask, 80 per cent of Canadians do call themselves environmentalists. We’ve changed some light bulbs and said no to the checkout clerk dangling plastic bags. But while some insist the revolution’s now rising up around the planet, polls keep telling us we’re stalled somewhere between furrowed brows and fervent action. Are we ready to make that leap and kick off the deep sea change that’s needed to stave off a coroner’s inquest on the planet?

From a global vantage point, the green scene is like a silent tsunami. Even those working within the movement haven’t grasped the scope of the momentum behind them, says California-based green guru Paul Hawken.

Hawken (author of Blessed Unrest: How The Largest Movement In The World Came Into Being And Why No One Saw It Coming) started tabulating all the organizations working on enviro and social justice issues worldwide and was floored. He found a whopping 2 million orgs, involving 100 million people who every day wake up focused on redefining our relationship to the planet. As a force, they’re nameless, leaderless and fractured across the space, so you’d never know, as Hawken says, that “it’s the largest and fastest-growing movement in the world.”

The luminary is convinced we’re in the middle of a grassroots sea change, from a world created by and for privilege to a world created by community.

Still, there may be a tide of people already off their chairs and cleaning local creeks, forming solar buying clubs, and jostling their politicians, but getting the rest of us to make that leap off the couch, to have that “aha” moment when we’re moved to play out our hopes for the world, is the next major challenge.

Call a few pollsters to help take our collective pulse on the prospect of a green call to arms and it’s clear there are duelling realities at play.

Canadians will open their wallets to organic goods, they say ($1 billion worth in 2006, to be precise), but “we’re just not prepared to pay a personal price,” says Vector Research prez Marc Zwelling.” Especially when you name that price, like, say, a 25 cent per litre gas tax, a sizable surcharge on our hydro bills, London-style congestion charges. We’re not ready to vote green either (doing so could lead us back to that pesky personal sacrifice issue). And what we need to get us past the psychological hump, besides generational change, says Zwelling, is crisis – one we can see, touch, smell and run from screaming.

Others say it’s all about how you frame it. York U marketing prof Alan Middleton says if we can link a purchase or behaviour change to our personal health metre, we see tangible reasons for sacrifice. Selfish? Maybe, but it’s more that people have trouble connecting to environmental issues unless a nephew has asthma, a sister’s got chemical sensitivities or our mother’s survived cancer.

Zeroing in on the need to reach out and touch someone, activists are trying new tactics to help bridge that disconnect and motivate real change.

“The thing to do right now is to show that other people are doing this as well,” WWF climate campaign manager Keith Stewart explains. “That’s what Earth Hour (when nearly a dozen major cities around the globe will turn off the lights for an hour) is really about, so you actually see the skyline of Toronto go dark and see that other people are concerned” – even though you can’t physically eyeball the greenhouse gases saved.

It’s also why websites like The Good Life (www.thegoodlife.wwf.ca) aren’t just interactive tracking devices; they let you see how many other people have signed on to the very same greenhouse-gas-saving actions across the country. (See Netizens For Nature, page 29 for more on green tracking.)

One thing has become clear in recent trawlings of Canadian opinion, says Stewart. “Once you’ve taken some action to reduce your own impact, you feel a lot better about demanding that somebody else do something.” So weatherstripping your windows and and stringing a clothesline might just be the key to getting the guts to demand more from our politicians.

And more we want. Says Environics VP Keith Neuman, “Canadians would like to see their country be a role model.” So far, it ain’t happening.

A fact doubly troubling now that we’re heading into an economic downturn and the feds have yet to take cues from our collapsing manufacturing sector to bolster a green economy. If we did this right, say activists, and repositioned the environment as an economic issue, we’d stimulate the kinds of green jobs blooming by the hundreds of thousands in bellwether economies like Germany. And environmental consciousness might for once survive the forecast economic downturn.

But where the feds leave us hanging, cities around the world are stepping in to fill the void. Activist-turned-councillor Gord Perks says we’re finally cluing in to the “think globally” part of the nearly 40-year-old bumper sticker, realizing that decisions about where we live and how we get to work have global consequences . And municipal governments are jumping in as ringleaders in a movement growing from the little guy up.

“Look at the C40 group of cities in every corner of the globe that are miles ahead of where federal governments are,” says Perks. “That’s where the action is, and that’s where the hope is.”

Hope. It seems like a loaded word amidst so much humanity bashing but Hawken is steadfast: “We’re now seeing human beings rise up and respond to the salient issues of our time – and they’re not American Idol or the latest muscle cars from Detroit.”

We may be at the stroke of midnight for the rest of our lives, but there’s good news, insists Hawken. “We won’t recognize ourselves in 10 years’ time.”
adriav@nowtoronto.com

students as intellectuals, (especially in this country) have a moral responsibility to speak out, take action and be active in their community locally and globally, because of the freedom that they have in this context.

-requoted from Noam Chomsky

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20080228.wnaftaottawasb28/BNStory/National/home

Ottawa plays oil card in NAFTA spat
With both Clinton and Obama campaigning on the future of free trade deal, Emerson reminds U.S. of its easy access to energy

STEVEN CHASE

From Thursday’s Globe and Mail

February 28, 2008 at 4:23 AM EST

OTTAWA — Americans’ privileged access to Canada’s massive oil and gas reserves could be disrupted if Washington cancels the NAFTA accord as Democratic presidential candidates threaten, Canadian Trade Minister David Emerson warned yesterday.

“There’s no doubt if NAFTA were to be reopened we would want to have our list of priorities,” he said.

“Knowledgeable observers would have to take note of the fact that we are the largest supplier of energy to the United States, and NAFTA has been kind of a foundation of integrating the North American energy market,” Mr. Emerson said.

“When people get below the rhetoric and start picking away at the details, you are going to find that it’s not such a slam-dunk proposition to go from the rhetoric to a meaningful improvement,” he said.

Canada and the United States have free trade in energy because the accord effectively prohibits discriminatory export controls on oil and gas. Mr. Emerson’s comments come after Democratic presidential candidates Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton promised Tuesday to withdraw the United States from the North American free-trade agreement after taking office, unless the deal was completely renegotiated.

The pact has become a target for criticism by U.S. unions, which blame it for the disappearance of thousands of jobs, but studies have repeatedly shown that trade has thrived and all three NAFTA signatories have benefited since the deal took effect in 1994.

But Mr. Obama’s rhetoric on the subject may be just that, CTV News reported last night. Citing Canadian sources, the network said that a senior member of Mr. Obama’s campaign team called Canada’s U.S. ambassador, Michael Wilson, within the past month, warning him that Mr. Obama would be taking some “heavy swings” at NAFTA in the campaign.

“Don’t worry, … it’s just campaign rhetoric, … it’s not serious,” CTV reported the campaign official as saying.

Late last night, a spokesperson for the Obama campaign said the staff member’s warning to Mr. Wilson sounded implausible, but did not deny that contact had been made. “Senator Obama does not make promises he doesn’t intend to keep,” the spokesperson told CTV.

Mr. Emerson called the Democratic candidates’ NAFTA vow political posturing aimed at party voters, predicting it would fade from sight if either wins the presidency.

But he said he’s nevertheless worried about a rising tide of protectionism in the United States. “It’s been getting more strident; it’s permeating congress … and it’s not just the heat of the presidential campaign that is causing concern, it’s the whole congressional system.”

During the final Democratic candidates’ debate before next week’s Texas and Ohio primaries, Ms. Clinton said Tuesday she would demand new environmental and labour provisions in NAFTA as well as a new dispute-resolution mechanism. And she’d eliminate the right of foreign firms to sue Washington for enacting measures to protect its workers. Mr. Obama agreed.

But Mr. Emerson said reopening the deal would open a can of worms, with new demands for changes from all countries. He said one beef Canada would have is the deal’s dispute-resolution mechanism, which failed to solve the long-running softwood trade war between Ottawa and Washington.

“If you reopen [NAFTA] for one or two issues, you cannot avoid reopening it across a range of issues,” he said.

He scoffed at Democratic suggestions that they want to toughen labour and environmental provisions, saying: “I don’t think the United States has got anything to teach Canada about labour and the environment.”

It’s far from certain that tearing up NAFTA would leave Canada without any trade deal with the U.S. That’s because its predecessor, the Canada-U.S. free-trade agreement (FTA) of 1988, was suspended, not cancelled, when NAFTA came into force and it was what delivered the benefits of free trade to the two nations.

“My understanding is that abrogation of the NAFTA would automatically trigger reversion to the FTA,” Michael Hart, a trade expert at Carleton University who helped negotiate the original Canada-U.S. free-trade deal, said.

“In U.S. law, there is both a NAFTA Implementation Act and an FTA Implementation Act. Congress would need to revoke the first, which would then reactivate the second,” Mr. Hart said.

Gordon Ritchie, an architect of the Canada-U.S. FTA, said Canada would be in a good position to weather things if the free-trade arrangements fell apart because the two economies have become much more integrated since 1992. Also, since then, multilateral trade rules have cut global tariffs and established a World Trade Organization system to arbitrate disputes that’s no worse than the NAFTA mechanism, he said.

“At the end of the day, the Americans would be foolish to embark on this course, but if they did, we could deal with it just fine,” Mr. Ritchie said. “It wouldn’t be the end of the world.”

Still, he noted, it’s not certain that Ms. Clinton and Mr. Obama are only thinking about Mexico when they criticize NAFTA. “Remember these comments were made in Ohio, and that sounds like Canada to me,” he said, noting that the northern state is suffering job losses that some groups blame on Canada.

International lawyer Lawrence Herman urged Ottawa to prepare a contingency plan in case either presidential candidate makes it to the White House, given the protectionist mindset of both.

“I think this is to be taken very seriously, since both Obama and Clinton seem to be speaking from the same hymn book on this,” said Mr. Herman, with Cassels Brock & Blackwell LLP in Toronto.

“We can’t just be complacent and not be thinking of a Canadian strategy in light of these recent developments,” Mr. Herman said.

With reports from Gloria Galloway and Shawn McCarthy

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20080228.wtorflaherty28/BNStory/National/home

Budget remarks see Miller branded as ‘isolationist’
Supporters, detractors disagree with Flaherty

JEFF GRAY AND TARA PERKINS

From Thursday’s Globe and Mail

February 28, 2008 at 5:07 AM EST

Friends and even political foes came to the defence of Toronto Mayor David Miller yesterday after he was branded “negative” and “isolationist” by federal Finance Minister Jim Flaherty over comments on the federal budget.

Mr. Miller criticized the budget on Tuesday for making little mention of Toronto and failing to make significant new investments in the city’s transit system.

Yesterday, Mr. Flaherty responded, pointing to Ottawa’s previously announced support for the Spadina subway extension to York Region and boasting of being part of the “first federal government in history” to fund a subway.

He then said the Toronto mayor was too focused on his city’s 416 area code while ignoring the suburban 905 belt.

“It’s too bad in a way that the mayor always seems to look at the negative side because there are so many positive things happening. There’s so much support for the Greater Toronto Area,” Mr. Flaherty told reporters after a speech at the Fairmont Royal York Hotel.

“It’s also too bad that he has an isolationist view, quite frankly, that he always looks only at the 416 and fails to look at the 905.”

Mr. Flaherty then argued that Southern Ontario was developing along the lines suggested by respected cities expert and author Richard Florida, head of the Martin Prosperity Institute at the University of Toronto’s Rotman School of Business.

“What is really happening in Southern Ontario … is that we’re having the great development of an urban centre, the kind of thing that Richard Florida talks about,” Mr. Flaherty said.

Dr. Florida, in an e-mail to The Globe and Mail, refused to be drawn into the political strife.

“We can’t afford to let politics get in the way of much-needed transit improvements,” he wrote.

“The 416 needs the 905 and vice-versa. Heck, we all need to be able to get around. We need a regional approach to transit for our mega-region. One of the key challenges to this region’s future is for the feds, province, mayor, and local figures to work out their differences and get on with it.”

Mr. Miller’s office said the mayor was unavailable for comment yesterday and denied there was any attempt to keep the mayor out of the spotlight to gear down his spat with Mr. Flaherty.

Stuart Green, a spokesman for Mr. Miller, said the mayor’s comments were justified, but pointed out that the mayor was critical of the lack of new funding for cities across the country, not just Toronto.

“He’s the mayor of Toronto. Putting Toronto’s needs first is his job,” Mr. Green said.

But Mr. Green also pointed to the budget’s inclusion of a rail line from Toronto to Peterborough, even as the city plans to build $6-billion worth of light-rail lines: “It’s fair to say that a transit line, like a Peterborough-Toronto rail link, was not at the top of our transit priorities.”

Mr. Miller’s budget chief, Councillor Shelley Carroll (Ward 33, Don Valley East), said Mr. Flaherty’s criticism of the mayor was uninformed. Mr. Miller’s light-rail plans reach out to Toronto’s boundaries, she said, including to boundary of Durham Region, home of Mr. Flaherty’s suburban riding.

“To his bailiwick . . . ” Ms. Carroll said.

“He really ought to take a look at the website.”

Even Councillor Denzil Minnan-Wong (Ward 34, Don Valley East), a Conservative and regular critic of the mayor, said the 416 area code should be the mayor’s No. 1 concern.

“It’s the mayor’s job to represent Toronto. … I don’t fault the mayor for speaking up for our city,” he said.

“However, the mayor has been using inflammatory language and has been spoiling for a battle with Ottawa,” he added.

“I don’t think that is good for the city of Toronto.”

Yesterday, several 905 mayors and regional chairmen also rose to Mr. Miller’s defence.

“I can’t recognize this description of isolationist from what I see,” said Oakville Mayor Rob Burton, who participates with Mr. Miller on several GTA political committees.

“He’s there, active, he’s engaging and contributing and we generally come to pretty good decisions as a group,” Mr. Burton said.

“I have never felt in any way slighted by Mr. Miller.”

Halton Region chairman Gary Carr, a former provincial Conservative MPP and a former federal Liberal MP, questioned the Finance Minister’s “approach” of taking digs at Mr. Miller and, weeks earlier, at Mississauga Mayor Hazel McCallion, who has repeatedly challenged Mr. Flaherty to debate her on the adequacy of federal support for local infrastructure.

“He has to realize … all of us [local politicians] are saying the same thing: The federal government has to be at the table,” Mr. Carr said.

“As of yesterday they were not.”

But Durham regional chairman Roger Anderson, who was head of the Association of Municipalities of Ontario when Toronto pulled out of the group in 2005, had a different view.

“It has always been somewhat Toronto first and the rest second,” he said. “It’s unfortunate.”

With a report from Jennifer Lewington

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20080228.wgayvictim0228/BNStory/National/home

Sexual orientation a factor in violence: Statscan

The Canadian Press

February 28, 2008 at 8:53 AM EST

OTTAWA — Gays, lesbians and bisexuals reported higher rates of victimization by violence than heterosexuals in 2004 — including sexual assault, robbery and physical assault.

The Statistics Canada study examined victimization rates, perceptions of discrimination, fear of crime and attitudes toward the justice system among gays, lesbians and bisexuals.

Similar studies have indicated some factors typical of the so-called gay lifestyle related to higher rates of victimization — the young, singles or students; those living in urban areas and people who go out at night tend to be at higher risk of violence.

But the agency says sexual orientation still figured in violent victimization, even with those factors taken into account.

The odds of being victimized by violence were nearly two times greater for gays and lesbians and 4.5 times greater for bisexuals than they were for heterosexuals.

Despite experiencing higher rates of violence, however, gays, lesbians and bisexuals did not express more fear.

Overall, more than nine in 10 gay, lesbian and bisexual Canadians indicated they were “somewhat” or “very” satisfied with their personal safety, a proportion similar to heterosexuals.

http://www.thestar.com/News/FederalBudget/article/307741

Some activists embrace Flaherty’s tax-free plan while others scorn it
Feb 28, 2008 04:30 AM
Tanya Talaga
Social Policy Reporter

The introduction of a tax-free savings account is hailed by some anti-poverty advocates as a big, first incentive to low-income earners to save money intended to be free of government clawbacks.

Others say the special savings account is just another way for the rich to get richer.

Starting in 2009, all Canadians, including the working poor and those on social assistance, will be able to save their money – up to $5,000 a year, tax-free – if they are 18 and over. The annual $5,000 limit builds yearly and account holders can withdraw their money at any time for any purpose.

“This is a very, very significant new measure for low-income people and has enormous potential,” said John Stapleton, a social policy expert and fellow at St. Christopher House and the Metcalf Foundation. “A lot of people on the left hate it because it’s too generous to the better off but I don’t think they are recognizing what it will do for low-income people.”

Theoretically, savings of up to $5,000 a year during the 47 years between 18 and 65, is $235,000. While it’s hard for low-income earners or those on social assistance to pay their rent or buy food much less save for the future, they might find themselves the sudden beneficiaries of an inheritance or settlement.

Stapleton points to the recent residential school survival benefits or even the hepatitis C settlement awarded by the federal government. If there is a program that allows them to put some money aside in a clear and definable way, that is what this is all about, he said.

The big question now is what will the provincial governments do with this new savings plan. Will they exempt the tax-free savings account as income and assets under provincial and territorial social assistance programs or not?

“It’s a question of how much they’ll allow people to save and still be eligible to get assistance,” said Stapleton. “That isn’t just a question for Ontario but every province in Canada.”

In Ontario, provincial officials are still reviewing the announcement to see what the impact will be.

Federal Finance Minister Jim Flaherty, who was in Toronto yesterday giving a breakfast speech, said the introduction of the tax-free savings account is a major structural change in the Canadian tax system. “I know it’s going to take time for the importance of this to strike people,” he said.

He called it the first major savings change since RRSPs were introduced in 1957, but said the United States and Britain already have such plans.

“Over time it will be very significant … it’s the miracle of compound interest, tax-free,” said Flaherty.

However, some aren’t overjoyed with the introduction of tax-free savings accounts. They say this is just another benefit for the upper-middle class and the rich to get richer and that the accounts will do nothing over time but give those families a vehicle to park money in a nest egg for their children.

“This isn’t even the beginning of a solution,” said Michael Mendelson, senior scholar for the Caledon Institute of Social Policy.

Look at the savings patterns of low-income earners, he said.

“The empirical reality is they can and will save relatively little,” he said.

Throwing “a few pennies” at those with low incomes while “shovelling hundred-dollar bills” to those with higher incomes is just a way to buy the complicity of advocacy groups while the gap between the rich and poor grow, he added. “How many people on social assistance save $5,000 a year?” he asked. “Zero.”

- With files from Rob Ferguson

http://www.thestar.com/News/FederalBudget/article/307743

Force an election if you don’t like budget, Harper taunts opposition leader
Feb 28, 2008 04:30 AM
Bruce Campion-Smith
Susan Delacourt
Ottawa Bureau

OTTAWA–Prime Minister Stephen Harper is taunting Stéphane Dion, saying if the Liberal leader doesn’t like the Conservative budget, he should vote against it and force an election.

Just a day after saying his party would grudgingly accept the latest budget, Dion yesterday was complaining about the Tories’ management of the economy.

But his complaints were met with a sharp rebuttal from Harper, who all but dared the Liberals to force an election over the financial blueprint unveiled this week.

“I want to talk about leadership, vision and credibility. Let me just say to the leader of the Opposition, when he comes and makes ferocious attacks on a budget that he has every intention of allowing to pass he simply has no credibility,” Harper said in the Commons.

Harper even referred to a blistering skit by comedian Rick Mercer that aired on CBC the night before, which mocked the Liberals’ endorsement of the Tory budget.

Harper’s jabs went to the heart of the dilemma facing the Liberals yesterday as they found themselves struggling to criticize the Tories’ economic record, and at the same time explaining why the government still had their support.

“We’ll find a way to not defeat the government and to express our disagreement with this budget,” Dion said, insisting the view had the support of Liberal MPs and senators.

“We have a very unanimous view … we’ll choose our time, we’ll choose our issues to go to election and to win it,” he said after a morning caucus meeting.

This was the Liberal mantra yesterday, but Liberal MP Garth Turner (Halton) said that MPs were finding it tough to take the taunting from Conservatives – so tough, in fact, that he thinks it will eventually prod Liberals to get more anxious for Harper’s defeat.

“I sense our caucus is more combative than I’ve seen it since I joined … so I think it’s not going to be long,” said Turner, who was elected as a Tory but who joined the Liberal caucus about a year ago.

In their own budget amendment released yesterday, the Liberals said the Tory budget tries to “mirror sound and intelligent Liberal policy proposals.”

But it goes on to say that the government “has made significant economic policy mistakes over the past two years and shown an NDP-like lack of fiscal prudence that prevent it from dealing with a downturn in the Canadian economy.”

That wording, as well as hints from Liberal MPs, suggest they’re looking for a bigger economic trigger to bring down the government.

MP Scott Brison (Kings-Hants) said the Liberals could be ready to pull the plug on Harper if they see the country going into deficit.

Turner, who’s made no secret of wanting an immediate election, said it may take several months for the economic woes to emerge that would spell Harper’s defeat.

“It’s hard to say, but I do believe that we’re probably another quarter, another three months away from knowing just how much the U.S. economy’s going to impact us,” he said. “I would absolutely think by the fall we would know that.”

But some MPs would prefer to choose a time before the summer.

What’s clear is that the Liberals want to get through the four by-elections on March 17 in Toronto, Vancouver and Saskatchewan – at least three of which they’re expected to win – to wrap themselves in a much-needed aura of victory.

Senator David Smith, one of the election campaign co-chairs, was blunt yesterday, telling reporters that the Liberals are going to provoke an election when they think they can win. “It’s about that simple, bottom line,” Smith said.

But with budget passage virtually assured and a compromise likely on an extension of the Afghanistan mission, the Liberals have given their approval on the two big issues facing the nation, raising the question about what other issue could warrant an election.

That’s why NDP strategists think this Parliament will last until October 2009, the time fixed for the next election in legislation.

New Democrat MP Thomas Mulcair (Outremont) said Liberal gripes ring hollow when the party has signalled its support for the budget.

“It’s a rather bizarre situation. Mr. Dion is just going to sit on his hands once again. They have no credibility. They’ve got an extraordinarily weak leader, indecisive,” he said.

At Queen’s Park, Premier Dalton McGuinty said there were positive steps in Tuesday’s budget, “but overall they were small steps.”

“It’s not as if there was a shortage of money,” he added, questioning the decision to pay down a large chunk of the federal debt when an economic slowdown looms.

“It demonstrates a lack of understanding about both the urgency of our circumstances when it comes to manufacturing in particular, and our ability to do more together in terms of helping this economy to grow.”

McGuinty said he was disappointed Ontario will get only $200 million in new infrastructure money when the province is counting on the federal government for $6 billion to help with its transit plan for the GTA and Hamilton.

- With files from Rob Ferguson

http://www.reportonbusiness.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20080227.wrontariotax0227/BNStory/Business/home

Flaherty wins allies in Ontario attack

RICHARD BLACKWELL

Globe and Mail Update

February 27, 2008 at 10:43 PM EST

Jim Flaherty indulged in another round of his favourite sport Wednesday – sniping at the Ontario government for its reluctance to reduce corporate taxes. And as the federal Finance Minister continues to get under the skin of the Premier of Canada’s largest province, he’s finding some allies among tax experts.

“I’m going to continue to plead with the province … to provide some relief to businesses,” Mr. Flaherty said at a breakfast speech in Toronto. “Business needs long-term structural change, like they’re doing in British Columbia, like they’re doing in Alberta.”

Ontario Premier Dalton McGuinty has resisted tax cuts, instead demanding that Ottawa focus direct support on individual troubled industries. “It would be nice to have a federal government which doesn’t seem to take so much delight in talking down the Ontario economy,” he said Wednesday, while repeating he had no intention of cutting business taxes in the province’s coming budget.

Several economists are echoing Mr. Flaherty’s concerns. “Ontario is really out of line,” said Dale Orr, chief economist for of Global Insight (Canada). Not only is Ontario’s corporate income tax higher than in other provinces, he said, its retail sales tax and capital tax are also impediments to business investment in the province.

Mr. Flaherty’s views are “bang on,” said Finn Poschmann, research director at the C.D. Howe Institute. “It’s absolutely egregious. He’s absolutely right that the Ontario government has shown no interest in being attractive to business, unless you’re somebody they want to give grants to.”

A projection of capital investment for 2008, released Wednesday by Statistics Canada, appears to support the view that Ontario is losing the fight to draw business dollars.

The province is expected to show the third-lowest growth in capital spending this year, at 3.1 per cent. Manitoba and Saskatchewan, by contrast, will likely see increases of over 18 per cent, Statscan said.

Other analyses suggest that if current trends continue, Ontario will remain the least-attractive jurisdiction – at least in terms of taxes on capital investment – for years to come.

A C.D. Howe study completed in December showed that effective tax rates on capital investment – after planned changes are adopted between now and 2012 – will be by far the highest in Ontario, at 31.2 per cent. By comparison, B.C. will be at 28.6 per cent, Quebec 19.5 per cent and Alberta 18.2 per cent. Those numbers don’t take into account changes under B.C.’s recent budget, which will see that province’s corporate income tax rate decline from 12 per cent to 11 per cent as of July 1, and to 10 per cent by 2011.

Ontario can’t ignore research that shows how important tax rates are in attracting investment, said Jack Mintz, a tax expert who runs a school of public policy at the University of Calgary.

“There has been study after study after economic study that show effective tax rates on capital do impact on investment,” he said. “Ontario’s effective tax rate on capital is by far the highest in Canada, but it’s also high relative to the U.S., and it’s high relative to many [other] countries.”

He cited a recent study by Bev Dahlby, an economist at the University of Alberta, who found that there is a direct connection between lowering corporate tax rates and increasing economic growth.

Mr. Dahlby said Wednesday that his analysis of corporate tax cuts in B.C. showed that the government didn’t lose any income over the long term, because of the increased economic activity. Ontario is “hurting itself very badly, in my view, by following a fiscal policy that is very anti-growth,” Mr. Mintz said.

He noted that Alberta’s move to increase oil and gas royalties might also be considered anti-business, but that province is quite prepared to slow down its economy slightly because of its roaring growth. “It’s time to slow down the train a bit,” he said. “But Ontario is not in Alberta’s position. They have a train that’s hardly moving.”

Still, that view is not universal. Andrew Jackson, economist for the Canadian Labour Congress, said tax rates are only one factor in influencing investment decisions. “Targeted support for real, on-the-ground new investments is a much more efficient use of public money,” he said. With files from Tara Perkins and The Canadian Press

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20080227.wcadmann0227/BNStory/National/home

Tories tried to sway vote of dying MP, widow alleges

GLORIA GALLOWAY AND BRIAN LAGHI

Globe and Mail Update

February 27, 2008 at 9:48 PM EST

OTTAWA —

The widow of former B.C. MP Chuck Cadman says two Conservative Party officials offered her husband a million-dollar life insurance policy in exchange for his vote to bring down the Liberal government in May of 2005.

The offer, which was summarily rejected by the dying man, is outlined in a biography of Mr. Cadman by Vancouver journalist Tom Zytaruk that is to be released on March 14. A copy of the manuscript, including an introduction by former Liberal prime minister Paul Martin, has been obtained by The Globe and Mail.

Prime Minister Stephen Harper is quoted in the book, Like a Rock: The Chuck Cadman Story, as confirming that a visit took place, and that officials were “legitimately” representing the Conservative Party. But he says any offer to Mr. Cadman was only to defray any losses he might suffer due to an election.

Sandra Buckler, a spokeswoman for Mr. Harper, said Wednesday that her boss never directed any party official to make any kind of financial arrangement with Mr. Cadman.

The men arrived at Mr. Cadman’s Ottawa office two days before the vote on the Liberal budget. It was apparent at that time that the House of Commons was evenly split on the money bill and the nod of the then-Independent MP would decide whether Mr. Martin’s Liberal government would survive. “The Tories actually walked in with a list of offers written down on a piece of paper. Included in their proposal was a $1-million life insurance policy — no small carrot for a man with advanced cancer,” the book states.

Dona Cadman, who is now running for the Conservatives in the Vancouver-area riding of Surrey North, was not in the office at the time. But she says her husband was furious when he returned to their apartment. “Chuck was really insulted,” she said in a telephone interview with The Globe Wednesday. “He was quite mad about it, thinking they could bribe him with that.”

Mr. Cadman died less than two months after the vote.

Ms. Cadman, who has read and approved the manuscript for the book, said she has “no idea” where the money for the life insurance was supposed to come from. “They had the form there. Chuck just had to sign.”

Ms. Cadman also said her husband never told her the names of the two officials. “He did know them but he said, no, he wouldn’t say who they were. I imagine they were up there somewhere along the line.”

Mr. Zytaruk writes that the only person in the office at the time of the visit by the officials was Mr. Cadman’s legislative assistant, Dan Wallace.

When Mr. Zytaruk broached the subject with Mr. Wallace, he writes, “he recoiled,” but said: “I believe Dona Cadman as the day is long. She has no interest in fabricating anything.”

The Globe was unable to find Mr. Wallace Wednesday.

Mr. Zytaruk, who writes for a Surrey newspaper, has covered stories about Mr. Cadman since the murder of his son drove him into politics. The Cadmans approached him in the days before Mr. Cadman died and asked him to write the biography.

After Mr. Cadman’s death, Mr. Zytaruk heard that Mr. Harper, who was then leader of the opposition, was paying a personal visit to the Cadman residence. Mr. Zytaruk rushed over and interviewed Mr. Harper in the driveway.

“Of the offer to Chuck,” he quotes Mr. Harper as saying, “it was only to replace financial considerations he might lose due to an election, okay. That’s my understanding of what they were talking about.

“I don’t know the details,” he said. “I can tell you that I had told the individuals — I mean, they wanted to do it — but I told them they were wasting their time. I said Chuck had made up his mind he was going to vote with the Liberals. I knew why, and I respected the decision, but they were just, they were convinced there was, there was financial issues and, there may or may not.

“They were legitimately representing the party,” Mr. Harper confirmed. “I said ‘Don’t press him, I mean, you have this theory that it’s, you know, financial insecurity, and you know, just, you know, if that’s what you say make the case,’ but I said ‘Don’t press it.’.”

Mr. Zytaruk said he saved the tapes of all of his interviews.

Wednesday, Ms. Buckler of the PMO wrote in an e-mail: “On Sept. 9, 2005, the then Leader of the Opposition visited Dona Cadman at her residence. During that visit, Dona asked him about this story. Subsequently, on the same day, a local reporter/author Tom Zytaruk asked him about Dona’s same story. The then Leader of the Opposition looked into the matter with party officials and could find no confirmation. And that is the last time he heard anything regarding this matter.”