The Diary volume seven

September 23rd 2001 to November 11th  2001


Sunday November 11th 2001
Ramblings

A lot of the same issues floating around this week as last: The Diversey commentary, the Gateway schmozzle, the Strathy Rd construction, but I will start with a move by Council to approve the site plan for the WalMart complex.
   A site plan is a complicated set of agreements that basically says to the outside world that the Council and developers (of anything) have reached agreement about the details of a construction. The site plan is where the municipality gets to stamp its imprint of local policy, beit the number of trees on a site , the design of the lamp posts or more importantly just who is going to pay for what costs. A site plan has to follow the zoning that is in place and the zoning has to follow the policies of the Official Plan. That is why it is strange that on Monday night the Council is going to approve a site plan agreement between Royal Cobourg, the Town and the PUC. Just how they can do this legally and upon what zoning the agreement was based on is an interesting question. The zoning, as we know has not changed from Agricultural, due to the ongoing court actions and appeals about the proposed zoning bylaw based on a new Official Plan amendment, both of which have not been declared legal and yet Council is going ahead in approving the site plan agreement. Perhaps they believe in planning in abstraction or they just feel like thumbing their noses at the process that the appellants have followed. The official reason is that by going ahead the developer is taking a risk and yet moving along in the construction process and who is Council to stop them; it's their risk not Councils.
   But Council should be treading very carefully here, the process is not something that should be trifled with. For as one wise old municipal councillor told me once (none I have known personally but a writer in the Municipal World magazine) "If you grant exemptions to a policy you don't have a policy!" The big political risk here is that by fast-tracking this application to accommodate the risk takers at Royal Cobourg they may alienate some of the silent taxpayers who will feel that Council is getting too cozy with Royal Cobourg and in fact has rigged the rules to help them!
   Back to the site plan approval process, the first I became aware of it was in an email from City Hall (thanks for the heads-up)

Subject: Royal Cobourg Centres Ltd.
Date: Fri, 9 Nov 2001 15:25:00 -0500
From: Glenn McGlashon gmcglashon <gmcglashon@town.cobourg.on.ca>
To: ben@eagle.ca, oliver.symons@sympatico.ca
Please be advised that Cobourg Municipal Council will be considering the application for site plan approval for the Wal-Mart development on Monday evening at 7:00 pm in the Council Chambers, Victoria Hall.
Glenn McGlashon
Manager of Planning Services

However the problem with this notice is that this event is happening with very little, or no, public notice on short notice. Surely if the Council is going to take such extraordinary steps and not follow usual practice just to accommodate a developer, they would want to mitigate such an event by the giving of ample public notice instead of sneaking it through on less than 1.5 working days notice!


On to the antics of last week's meeting where you should remember that there were only three items of paper to be discussed in the official agenda. Well true to form (the length of the meeting being inversely proportional to the length of the agenda) the meeting lasted two hours. One of the sights to behold, so I am told, was the witnessing of the Deputy Mayor in high dudgeon (high dudgeon n : a feeling of intense indignation (now used only in the phrase "in high dudgeon") over a piece of paper that Keith Oliver had circulated about the ownership and quality of a gateway in Guelph. KO said it was a municipal effort and BS (note the apt initials!) said it was a Knob Hill Farms entryway. The upshot was that the "L" word (liar) was bandied about.
Both sides claimed victory each stating that the other was not recognising the true situation. Experts may have to be called in to settle this matter of municipal importance.

The LACAC has found its expert, (we left them looking for an expert a couple of weeks ago) so that now the necessary historical report may be completed and attached to the Superbuild funding application for the waterfront project. Mr Chris Borgal, a highly respected member of the building conservation and architectural community has decided to come to live in Cobourg. Keith Oliver found out and suggested that he be used by LACAC to complete the needed report, he was and now has recommended that there are a couple of buildings that are of historical significance. The problem is that not everybody will agree with him. One of the two buildings recommended for maintenance is the low building, and the oldest, next to the creek. The Farmers Market people have long had their eyes on this building for some time as a winter market so that idea can be supported by some very easily however he also suggests that the newest building may have some significance as an example of a post-war modern building. How will the arty-fartys of the conservation movement deal with that one?

It seems as though the legal battle over the right to appeal to the OMB that Keith Oliver is pursuing may hit yet another legal snag. As you should recall the last we heard was that a date had been reserved, January 14th, to hear a leave to appeal the Presiding Justice's (Madame Epstein) decision of last month (which took three months to release). Now it has been discovered (scoop alert) that that date has been scrubbed as Royal Cobourg has decided to file a motion to dismiss this request (leave to appeal) So just who is holding up the plans now? But what does that matter if Council is going to allow Royal Cobourg to get into the construction process without the zoning (see the first story).
   In a sidebar to this story I met a person today who talked about what a waste of taxpayers money this is. Well Folks, let me make this clear. ROYAL COBOURG IS PAYING ALL THE TOWN"S LEGAL COSTS. It's all part of the siteplan agreement.

For about a year now I have been conversing with a fellow who went to the same school as I did and who has lived in Australia for many years. It was some surprise for me to discover that we have the same roots, the same school experiences and also the same liberal points of view. We have been struggling to discover the roots of these opinions when the school experience (a military boarding school) would never appear to nurture such feelings. To cut a long story short let me share with you (Ooops I have been watching Mr Bill far too long for I am aping his style) an email received last week. It explains some of the similarities these anti-terrorism bills are having on legitimate dissent and the pursuits of freedom in the western world. I am doing this with the encouragement of a couple of readers that I shared this with, on a confidential basis, and they said I must publish. So with thanks to Michael Duffy here goes:
Ben:
As you will note, I check your site weekly just to see what's happening and how you deal with it. I'm impressed with what you're doing and I like the way you do it. Grass roots democracy has been appropriated as a synonym by the mealy-mouthed and terminally venal (the people whose snouts we will always find in the trough) for ramming their agenda through regardless.  So it's doubly pleasing that you've snatched it back on behalf of the people.
   I am struck by the similarities between Oz and Canada, at least at the base level of local government where the usual suspects waffle fulsomely in an attempt to disguise their rampant self-interest. When people start using "progress" as an excuse for social vandalism - the destruction or misappropriation of open space, kids' places or heritage places, the erosion of the true community through the  systematic economic murder of the corner store and its replacement by Big Babylon Hypermart - my cynic's hat slips into place and I reach for my keyboard - like you do, only not quite as well organised. I'm an inveterate newspaper letter writer and I have an excellent
strike rate.
   Your question on the use of "terrorism" to impose limits on the democratic rights of people is cogent and applies to Oz as it does to Canada. I think our Tories are promising "tougher" ( as if this was some John Wayne cock-measuring exercise) laws to deal with suspected terrorists and their associates. Unfortunately Labor doesn't appear to have established how it would do things differently, which makes Saturday's General Election about as interesting as watching cabbage grow.
   What they're deliberately concealing from the people is that State and Federal police forces throughout Australia - not to mention the spook agencies - actually already have adequate powers to deal with the reality, if it actually existed. But to use the boogie man in Afghanistan as an excuse for blanket powers is cynical (because the public is in a fearful mood - which they've created deliberately - and they're compounding the cynicism by trading on that) and dangerous (because these "extra powers' laws rarely get repealed and before you know it the concept of citizens' rights only features in nostalgia quiz nights - hey, do you remember when you could think what you liked?).
Our stand on these matters goes back to what we've been talking about: it's another side of caring about people. It's following that still small voice in your head that says, quietly and insistently so you can't ignore it: "I just can't go along with this and I can't let it go by without telling people why". The little fucker can get you into all sorts of strife, but somehow I wouldn't have it any other way. It's particularly important in these times when the ruling classes determine the consensus and demand that the rest of us to go along with it, to the point where dissent becomes treason. My old mate George Orwell would have a lot of fun with fucks like Blair and Bush because they're an outstanding illustration of what he wrote about in his essays and in Animal Farm and 1984. Old-fashioned as it may be,
I dip into Orwell for a bit of fresh air and clear vision from time to time.
   The long and the short of it is: Keep at it Ben. You've obviously got a good local audience and now an international web readership. So you must be doing something right!
Regards
Michael

Today is Remembrance Day and we celebrate the sacrifices of people who got involved, in much simpler times to defend a way of life and to answer the call of patriotism (that's the official reason and many volunteered to do just that, but others needed three squares and a bed). How ironic it is that we will be marching at the same time the freedoms we march to celebrate will be truncated by Bill C36!

So March 23rd is going to be the day that the PCs choose another leader. Will it be shortass Flaherty (he is only 5'3'') or the work-ethic challenged (read alleged lazy) Ernie Eves (I hope he changes his hair style in the mandatory makeover: his current slick gangster look does nothing for me). If the readership of these pages is anything to go by the race will be pretty ho-hum; see the first sentence of the email below from a person who obviously doesn't give a toss and prefers to talk about local issues:
Ben
I think no one is responding to your poll because none of us are Tories. What are we going to do about the review to close Thomas Gillbard Public School? We have to come up with suggestions and reasons to keep it open or the KPRDSB will close it because it's underenrolled and therefore costs too much to function.
   The results of the current poll are as follows:

Perhaps the participation will pickup as we get nearer to March 23rd. I intend to monitor and publish results monthly.

As you know I am infavour of a commercial development on the waterfront because if we just allow that land to be used as greenland and open space it may look nice but has done nothing for the economic revitalisation of the downtown. A poll published this week amplified that point. Many of the tourists surveyed were boating people and had been attracted by the Lake/Marina. Even they recognised that there isn't much to do once they come here. A telling point from a bunch of people who stare at the open sky and watch for wind changes for entertainment! So this week I thought in order to beef up the copy for the column I would ask someone who I thought would be in favour of the land being saved and using the Diversey buildings for something else to write a few words. The fellow I asked told me that he wasn't really in favour of saving those buildings but he has an opinion about why we should save old buildings. This will be found here. But of more interest he sent a copy of the exchange between himself and the Town about the 'coke machine' currently sited on King St outside 'Mojays'

November 1, 2001
Ms Susan Dawe
LACAC Coordinator
Victoria Hall
Cobourg
Dear Ms Dawe:
Coca-Cola Dispenser
I am writing with reference to the Coca-Cola dispenser that has recently appeared on the sidewalk between Mojay’s and the Henley Arcade.  It can easily be seen from Victoria Hall.
   The location of the dispenser is in the downtown heritage district and on King Street, which  the Town has recently taken great care and expense to upgrade and beautify.  The Coca-Cola dispenser is not of a “heritage” type such as was used by Bell Canada for their new phone booths on King Street, but is the standard  red and white, fluorescent lit type.
     I am aware that the appearance of buildings, signs and sidewalk signs in the heritage district are all under the jurisdiction of LACAC.  I am therefore curious to know whether LACAC has approved the installation of this Coca –Cola dispenser?
   I would like to observe that the problem is not related to the desirability of selling Coca –Cola,  but is rather related to the possible proliferation of  similar dispensing machines down the entire length of King Street in downtown, thus tending to nullify the intention of upgrading it as a heritage attraction.
   I would be pleased if you could bring my letter on this matter to the attention of LACAC at the next regular meeting, with the intent that they should review the matter and take appropriate action.  I imagine that my letter is self-explanatory, but I would be willing to attend the LACAC meeting to further explain my concerns.  Please advise me if such attendance is required.
Yours truly,
Mr XXX

The answer is extremely insightful to those of us who think we know the system.

From: Susan Dawe sdawe <sdawe@town.cobourg.on.ca>
To:
Cc: Ian Roger iroger <iroger@town.cobourg.on.ca>
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 3:30 PM
Subject: RE: LACAC
 Dear       ,
  The matter of the Coca-Cola machine is not a LACAC matter but rather a  Engineering matter.  The machine is on the right-of-way on the boulevard  without Town permission and the owner of the machine (Mojay's) will be receiving a letter from the Director of Operations in this regard  instructing him to remove the machine.  The owner does have the option to  apply to Council for permission to have the machine there and there aren't  any regulations prohibiting said machine from placement ont the right of way  as it would be on town property.  If you wish to any further information, I  invite you to speak directly with the Director of Operations.
This is for your information.
Sincerely,
S.C. Dawe, AMCT, Ba.
Legislative Services

So the Town can go to war with the owners of a local Cafe over their sign, and even remove it, but only sends a letter to Mojays. Stay tuned!


A big funeral for a big man locally on Friday; Joe Dunn was laid to rest. In the new Cobourg it is refreshing to celebrate the originals and there appears to be less of them around everyday. Those of us who chose Cobourg certainly have to respect the people who were born here and stayed. Joe Dunn was one of them.

The news that the 'Distress Line' has gone out of business was no surprise to those around the non-profit scene. This agency, a local one that has provided a sympathetic ear to those people needing someone to talk to and help lower stress levels as well as all sorts of other good things, has decided that the stress of fundraising is too much and in the absence of Board and volunteers have decided to pack it in.
   This, as I said comes as no surprise as all non-profits who fundraise in the traditional manner (Bingos and chocolate bars) just can't cut it. The big reason for the failure is not bad management of resources it is the lack of money from fundraising. That is not for the lack of trying, it is because Bingos don't raise that much money anymore and that is because people are spending their money on slot machines at racetrack casinos.
   Racetrack casinos may have fixed the horse industry but it sure has killed other sectors of the economy notably Thrift shops and non-profit agencies. It is time to ask the government of the day to review the whole scenario. We cannot have disposable income being funneled away from fundraising activities. If Bingo (which is the main source of fundraising for many non-profit groups) does not generate enough funds and in fact may even cost the group money because not enough money was raised to even pay for the Bingo arrangement due to gamblers preferring slot machines to bingo cards then the non-profits must be allowed to share the slot machine money.
   To be really fair why is the slot machine money only being shared with the host municipality instead of the catchment area? Why should Cavan Twp get all the money when only a percentage of the gambling money comes from Cavan?
   A lot needs to be done in this area and until it is non-profit groups will continue to disappear. The Distress Line was the 'canary in the cage'. More will follow.

An interesting story came this way today. A few weeks back there was an internet virus called SIRCAM, a worm. The way it works is simple, somebody sends you an email with an attachment (which contains the virus) the attachment is opened and the virus goes to work. It attaches itself to your email programme and randomly selects people to send email to from your address book. It also selects messages from your files to be used as the attachment which will deliver the virus from your machine to an email recipient who came from your address book. So much for the facts now the story. A poverty activist received an email from the Metro Toronto Police's investigation unit which contained SIRCAM as an automatically Worm generated message dated 5th November. Two things became apparent: one is that the Metro Police's computers were infected and secondly this guys name was in their email. It is not hard to conclude that because the activist had not emailed the Police at any time somebody was keeping tabs on him and had probably forwarded email with his name on it to the investigations unit. And this is being done under existing laws. Mrs Caplan are you watching?

Just picked up a copy of "the little paper that could" - the Brighton Independent and it contains three letters of interest: two about the marijuana situation reported on last week. Both expressed support for the jailed person and called on the Justice Minister to sort the situation out. what was interesting is that they were from Edmonton Alberta and Washington DC. Oh the power of the internet! The third letter was an interesting one for what it did not say. It was from our local MPP Doug Galt and calls on our MP Paul Macklin to get some train services in Trenton. I guess the provincial election has started already and Doug needs to remind the Trentonians that he is still in business and what better way to show it than beat up on the Federal MP.

How about this (it's a joke item) it came from a newsgroup I read
Subject:
Taliban Virus?
Date: Sat, 10 Nov 2001 22:17:57 GMT
From: jafar6 <jafar6@optonline.net>
Organization:
Sorry for sending a virus to the newsgroup, but this virus requires it to be
sent to everyone I know.
Jafar-6
________________________________________________________________
DEAR RECEIVER,
You have just received a Taliban virus. Since we are not so
technologically advanced in Afghanistan, this is a MANUAL virus.
Please delete all the files on your hard disk yourself and
send this mail to everyone you know.
Thank you very much for helping me.
Abdulla Talibanian hacker

To respond to this article click here

Sunday 4th November 2001
Ramblings

First things first let me say thank you to the readers from far away, using my site tracker, as anybody can do (go to the bottom of the page click on the counter and go to page details), I can tell who the foreign visitors to this site are. Those of you from Eagle.ca or Sympatico don't count as foreign but I appreciate you as well, but the exotic ones come from servers that can be tracked. So people from the Royal Bank, Bank of Nova Scotia, Bell Canada and SSFC are welcome. Even the many visits from the Provincial government server must enjoy this site as they keep coming back. One person enjoyed it so much they stayed 43 minutes!! Anyway in these paranoid times even I twitched a bit when I followed the frasercom.ca link to discover who was behind it, look at this:

I wonder what these folks do except look at good websites? Anyway thanks to all for coming these past weeks.

Went to Council on Monday night, the Jubilee Parkland was being finally sold off. I couldn't contain myself I had to tell someone what I thought, after all I have been mouthing off on these pages for weeks and really should tell Council, in person, what I thought. A picture tells a thousand words, the looks on the councillors faces when the four deputants stood at the podium to unload on Council was priceless: disdain, condescension, boredom, dislike, indifference, superiority all emotions appeared at one time or another. And all received the political raspberry that I have spoken of many times, the situation of being graced with no questions.

On the agenda was the transfer of three taxi licenses. If you remember the issuing of these licenses, about two months ago was a controversial item as the Town really did screw up the procedure and the winners of the licenses were  independents from Port Hope. Well some of these independents now want to sell their businesses (one car and a license) to the big boy in port Hope, Abby's Cabs. The taxi bylaw is quite clear, licenses are not transferable, except under the provisions of the bylaw. Well guess what? In another part of the bylaw holders of licenses are allowed to transfer licenses if they are part of a business that is being sold. So what has happened here is that although licenses cannot be transferred the business that depends on the license can and when that is allowed the license goes as well. Very confusing no wonder the powers that be pulled the whole business off the Council agenda.

How about that Mayor Austin, he doesn't like the idea of having to pay extra taxes to the ambulance so they can pay their people properly. His answer is to bill the ambulance company $500 every time the Port Hope Fire brigade goes to an accident. DUH  who's going to pay the $500 Rick? The ambulance fairy?

Hats off to "the little paper that could", the Brighton Independent. In an issue this week they explained the conditions they are working under since they printed a story about the illegal growing of marijuana for medicinal purposes. It's a complicated story that got worse when the main defendant was jailed for eight days before being bailed. Despite being in bad medical condition she was placed in overcrowded conditions and ending up sleeping on the floor next to the toilet, that's what you have to do when you don't have seniority in the cell!. But where the story gets really scary is the telling by the paper of having to succumb to a search warrant of their computers by the police. Freedom of the press only goes so far I guess. Since when does writing about allegations of illegality get your computers searched?

What does the Minister of Defence's monitoring committee really do and why is it hiding behind fraser.com instead of gc.ca?

Now the email:
In your column you were critical of LACAC commenting  that part of the Diversey property is part of an important visual link between downtown and the marina.  In fact this is not new at all.  Council passed a bylaw years ago designating the views  of the harbour from King Street down First and Second Streets as visual and pedestrian links.   I first became aware of this when the (now defunct) plans to build condominiums west of Division Street were announced.  The importance of these links were reiterated in the public input to the CAUSE Committee and were incorporated into their report. These visual and pedestrian links will allow the downtown and harbour to be connected physically, commercially and emotionally for every future generation.

I went down to  Diversey  and paced out the property.   It turns out
that the width required to develop the link as continuation of Second
street links is only the western third of the Diversey property, leaving
the rest to be developed in any number of ways.  In fact a good design could incorporate the need for a visual and pedestrian link into the overall framework, thus being part of the entire development of the property.

I enjoy your columns, but in this case I feel that you have uncovered a dark plot that does not actually exist.
You may think I see a dark plot I do, the plot here is to pick and choose which of the parts of the Official Plan that suits them.

Hi, enjoyed your ramblings very much, the BUM thing was cool. Thought I'd point out l small error: John Sewell writes for EYE, not NOW. Oops.
Deb
Thanks Deb, you are right and I owe John Sewell an apology. Fancy me thinking he writes for NOW not EYE.
Ben:
A pretty good issue this week.
Jim
Thanks Jim. I must say that considering the topic last week was talked about by many I was shocked to only get Jim's feedback, in fact the response was deafening in its silence. It appears to me that nobody wants to talk about our 'men in blue' for whatever reasons. So I won't mention them again until after the sentencing.


Whilst the boys at Royal Cobourg are dusting off the bulldozers and clearing their land, hey it's theirs and they can do what they want with it, I would hope they are going to plant winter wheat, the Secondary Plan appellants have received notice of a pre-hearing conference for December 6/7.

Big night on Monday night at Council: three items on the agenda, 1 delegation, one report of a public meeting and a memo! Perhaps Spoons will make the Cougars at 8pm after all. The problem is that according to someone's law not (Murphy or Parkinson) the length of the meeting is always inversely proportional to the length of the agenda. It's as though all the Councillors, who are dressed up and have nowhere to go can't let go and they prolong discussion of anything just to keep the meeting going. Still if they don't there will be more time for the beer drinking (see last weeks column)


I do apologise for the paucity of content this week but my sideline has caught up with my hobby and writing time is thin this week.

Having just checked the results of the current poll running on this page (top right panel) it seems that nobody cares about the provincial leadership race. Many conclusions can be drawn by the fact that only one of our faithful readers has voted in the poll. Draw your own conclusions!

To respond to this article click here

Sunday 28th October 2001
Ramblings
A lot of different observations this week, local, provincial and national.


The big local news is the trial of the Deputy Police Chief, Kyle Foster (KF), who is appearing in court some years after his arrest for driving whilst impaired. The facts are these (before I start to relate this news you, the reader must understand that in this story I am torn between balance and disclosure because I happen to like all the participants .... Hey just the facts ma'am):
On the 9th of November 1999 Inspector Kyle Foster was stopped on the 401 exit ramp and asked to blow into the 'green thing', he tested positive  and was taken to the OPP copshop for a blood test, He then tested .112 and .108. The legal limit is .08. The alcohol came into his system as a result of consuming wine and beer in a nine hour period.
Testimony reveals that the nine hour period occurred on a day that he and the Police Services Boards of Port Hope and Cobourg had a joint meeting. So the day went like this: Now the questions and gossip. Placing this arrest in the context of a very political and nasty turf war between the OPP and the Cobourg Police about a contract to police Hamilton Township, speculation abounds about why the thin blue did not bend and charges were laid. Also reports of Chief Kay being at the OPP station house and his conduct there are confused. Some reports allege that he was there trying to get his Deputy out and allegations of intimidation toward the OPP officer were heard. I do believe that Chief Kay has asked for a separate report be undertaken to investigate his conduct on the night concerned.

Unfortunately this case and its reporting has exposed the underbelly of local politics. The practice of 'having a few cold ones' after meetings is a normal one for many local politicians. Hey I blew up a few brain cells when I was on Council, the best boozeup is the Quarter Century Club night but I digress but many a councillor has had trouble remembering the night before on the day after that yearly event. These practices have resulted in many cynical remarks about where the actual council meetings take place. In the early 80s councillors and staff went to the Legion to debrief, in the late 80s early 90s they moved to the Cat and Fiddle and the last bunch of councillors moved to Kelly's. The Kelly's bunch still meet and call themselves the 'alumni' I would guess that Police Services Board extra-curricular activities would have followed a similar pattern. So when I read the chronology of that unfortunate night I was not surprised. I feel sorry for the participants as they have been existing in a time warp, trying to have it both ways. Setting examples and publicly condemning the mixing of alcohol and cars whilst privately indulging.

My questions are very simple  and I ask:

Now the more interesting questions: All I can say is that this incident and others have convinced me that the Police Services Board should be a fully elected Board accountable to the voters. This Board, and every other PSB in the Province, is totally unaccountable and because it has no directly elected members we cannot do a damn thing about it, sad!

I see that Deputy Mayor Spooner (he of the red hair) is complaining that he is getting phone calls at home about the smoking bylaw. Well Bob if you don't want to bothered at home you should be the Mayor and have an office number!

On monday night the Council will legislate a four way stop at Chapel and College streets. This came about as a result of a presentation by local residents last week. The presentation consisted of all the requisite components of a successful petition. You had your high-profile residents and home owners, your mandatory children and a petition signed by others of the same ilk. Who on Council is going to listen to staff recommendations in the face of such an onslaught.

Another observation from last Monday night. An application for a rezoning for legal enterprise (a storage locker business) came up. All was fine but the application was questioned by Councillor Jackson (a former President of the Chamber of Commerce even) who wanted to know if the Town can support another locker emporium. Pam, Oh defender of the free market system you cannot be questioning business viability in your seat, that is not your job. You have to make sure that the zoning fits and vote for it. The "Market will prevail"; your question is redundant!

The Diversey situation is not going away and even appears to be getting more complicated. The root of the problem (lack of progress on a funding application) is the demand from the Superbuild people that any application must be accompanied by a heritage report from the LACAC. They do not have the expertise to do one so they are going to get an expert. But in the reporting of all this a phrase turned up that set my hackles arising. "Part of the overall project is the development of the water treatment property [Diversey], viewed as a critical pedestrian and visual link between downtown and the marina" (Cobourg Daily Star 26th October). So can we now discern that whatever we have suggested, other than the above, is now redundant as somebody has decided that the area is going to be "a critical pedestrian and visual link between downtown and the marina"  Where do those of us who think differently fit in now?

In a lighter vein we have learned that local radio personality, John Russell, has obtained 'a sort of unicycle' - a skatebike. I will try to get pictures but John does still pledge to ride between Port Hope and Cobourg on it. But he does need sponsors so chip in and send him on his way (372-5401 and ask for the newsroom)

Moving on to Provincial Affairs I received an email that is self-explanatory, and who says that bureaucrats and politicians don't have a perverted sense of humour:
As I'm sure you are all aware Com Soc has a contract with Andersen Consulting. I'm sure you also know that they have created a computer program that is being implemented across the province.  And I'm sure you also know it has been a pretty big disaster.  But do you know what title they give social assistance recipients?
Benefit Unit Member.
I'll leave you to do the acronym.
Bet those good old boys around the board room had a good chuckle when they came up with that.
Just thought you might like to know.
Sarah

Being a confirmed news junky leads me to watch many websites and read three newspapers a day. One of the publications I read is "NOW" magazine. A couple of columnists really get me going and also they give us early notice of interesting items. One article written by John Sewell, the former Mayor of Toronto, talked about the new municipal act (which is 365 pages long). The facts that the act is not municipality friendly or that the real intent of the legislation is to further control them by mandatory Provincial linkages did not move me (what else could be expected from a government full of control freaks) but what did was the statement from the Minister of Municipal Affairs. This comment comes in the context of my position that meaningful consultation by governments has disappeared. "We've consulted extensively" says the Minister Chris Hodgson.  Without revealing whom they consulted with or the number of consultation sessions. But what was revealed was that since the bill was introduced in 1998 the Ministry has received over 300 written submissions. Three hundred submissions over a three year period in a Province of 10 million people and the Minister has the gall to say, "We have consulted extensively!" - HAH!

In another story in NOW this week is one about the OCAP demonstration last week. Now remember that the police actions described in the article took place BEFORE the implementation of the new anti-terrorism act. When protesters, who weren't protesters at the start of the march just people assembling in a public place, formed up they were accosted by police who demanded that they open their bags for a search (this is illegal under the Charter of R & Fs) and those who did not submit were arrested under the charge of "breach of peace". Those who did get searched also had their photos taken.  Those arrested were handcuffed and left for hours, strip searched and denied access to phones. Apparently the actions of the police have attracted the attention of prominent lawyers who are prepared to go to court to defend the Charter. Paul Copeland, one of the lawyers involved said, "Certainly the treatment of the people arrested was illegal." He went on to say that the option of suing the police is being contemplated because complaining through the official process is a waste of time and doesn't work.

Watching the "Capital Gang" last night I was cheered to see that the arch neo-con, Robert Novak, is now starting to pick up on the fallibilities of the US running of the war. He even derided the 'anti-terrorism bill' as "An FBI wish list" perhaps we will now get some decent debate about the draconian bills that are coming our way.

More pressure is needed on Mr Chretien who appears to have over-ridden all the assurances of the Justice Minister when she tried to allay the fears of disbelievers. He has said that there will not be a sunset clause in the new anti-terrorism bill. I guess that Canada will be one of the few western democracies without one.

This weeks e-mail:
Having local government go out to the people
is an interesting way of educating people to
the ins and outs of how that government works.
I do have one question though; if I were denied
access to the Northumberland Mall , for what-
ever reason, would I be denied access to the
sitting of my council the day it sits between
a shoe store and Bootlegger?
The mall is ,after all, private property.
The idea that government must sit at the
pleasure of a numbered company doesn't sit
well with me. The possibility that any citizen
could be denied access to their right to
participate in that government , because of a
property owner's legal right to exclude that
citizen is a little unsettling, whatever the good
intentions of the municipal government.
 Mike Wladyka
Port Hope
A good question Mike and should be dealt with all the other ramifications of the new public security act and our purported rights of freedom of assembly. It should be noted that a court case in Toronto a couple of years ago ruled that the Eaton Centre, by virtue of its size and traffic can be deemed to be public space and not subject to usual trespass laws.

Dear Editor
I don't think anyone watching the CBC's Canada: A People's History could miss the similarities between the poor marching in the 1930's and the 0CAP march a couple of weeks ago.  They were both marching to bring attention to their plight, hunger and affordable housing.  Both marches had their share of trouble makers with their own agenda.  And the Governments of the day, both then and now, took the easy way out and focused their attention on the trouble makers, ignoring the real reason for the march.. hunger and affordable housing!
Doug LLoyd
Comparisons of new laws, old situations and other social phenomena to OCAP is very interesting and just proves to me that the 'authorities' will always use whatever perversions of existing laws to achieve their own ends (control of the population and suppression of dissent). For more comments about this opinion read elsewhere in this week's ramblings.


 
 

Sunday October 21 2001
Ramblings
Column 33

Congratulations to the Mayor and Council for a successful experiment in public entertainment. Moving the Council on Monday night to the Mall was a good move in educating the public in civics. Now all we have to do is to construct a meaningful exercise in public engagement as opposed to public entertainment and we may have the interactive municipal scene that some of us would enjoy.
   I hear that Santa's chair, at the Mall, may be open. Perhaps on the hours that he isn't using it the Mayor could arrange a public session like the Kings of old and the Sheiks in the Middle East hold court, and the peasants of Cobourg can appear before the ruler to ask for relief, the others can do what they have always done; talk to him at Rotary!
   Monday's exercise was even so successful that the tightlipped  (If I don't say anything I can run for Mayor in 2005) Councillor MacCaughey actually uttered serious comment (that means no smartass remarks/jokes) in public - twice!!


At that same meeting another Councillor, who is facing increasing scrutiny about her work habits; Pam Jackson (gossipers hear private complaints about council time eating into her retirement travel plans), was quoted as saying that when she looked at Jubilee Park all she saw "Was a silly little boat!". Perhaps if she got out of the back seat of the limo and stopped waving to her minions she might not appear to be the Marie Antoinette of Cobourg politics, and actually see the potential of a gateway in a large green space. Both she and Deputy Mayor Spooner obviously judge the success of a park by the number of occupants instead of the green space value.

Another observation gleaned from the local media is based on a quote from a member of the Parks and Rec Advisory Board where he was quoted to be challenging the parents of skateboarders to come up with some money to help pay for a skateboard park. Is going to be an attitude now, "We will only put in facilities if you put up money too!"? What about the recommendations of the P&R masterplan and the proposed skateboard park?

On the topic of public engagement there is an advertisement running that asks for Cobourgers to phone their councillors about a smoking bylaw. It is interesting that all the phone numbers listed, with the exception of one, are the home numbers of the members of Council. The only office number listed is that of the Mayor, I guess he doesn't want to be bothered after hours.

I have been criticised by a couple of people about the report card I published last week here, on the Mayor's performance. They disagreed with me and said that I had been a bit hard on him. If you consider that some of those promises concerned political restructuring, a matter out of his control and totally unsupported by our neighbours, points for those would be lost. Without that wishful thinking his rating might have moved up from 32% to about 50%.

The Strathy Road planning issue doesn't seem to go away, what with the paper running anti-Oliver letters on a constant basis, not that I blame them as most of the letters on this topic would be in that vein, but I do know that letters that support Mr Oliver are on the editor's desk, all he has to do is print them. Anyway the big news this week, and it's a scoop for the Report, is that a date has been set for the next and final court appearance - it's in January of 2002. Now how does Royal Cobourg feel about the motion to dismiss now? I do hear that the bulldozers will be revving up in a couple of weeks. I guess that contempt of the judicial process could be a corporate trait if RCCL does that.

Did anybody else notice the orgasmic coverage of the latest tourism effort of the County by the publisher of the magazine, the Cobourg Daily Star, a plushy fluffy leaflet guaranteed to cater to the 'beemer' and "Annex" sets. which was profiled for two days in the house organ. I can't wait for the whines (I think justified) from the Port Hope tourism crowd about the plethora of Cobourg coverage to the detriment of the other county attractions.

I see Mr Bill has done it again, for those who care, his column, entitled "Afghanistan: two views", is 25 inches long, somebody else's e-mail (two pieces) covered 20 of those inches! What I want to know is Mr Bill's view not two emailers. And I'm paying for this?

Moving on to Provincial Affairs I can see the next election already. The Tories will be running on a new Mike Harris Flaherty/Clement/Ecker/Stockwell/Witmer/Hodgeson Common Sense Revolution (I'm sorry but the Flaherty Tories doesn't quite have a ring to it yet) and the Liberals will be running on the old Common Sense Revolution!

Hands up all those who are suspicious about the intentions of the Federal government and its new anti-terrorist legislation? I see the black hands of all the Chiefs of Police behind this one. Now they have the perfect anti organised crime/internal dissent legislation that they have been lusting after for years. I think we should start a pool to figure out just how long it will be before Chief Fantino (TOs chief) arrests John Clark of OCAP for terrorism. I know Anne McClennan (the Justice Minister) has promised that internal dissent and international terrorism are birds of a different feather, but I don't trust her - I'm from Missouri on this one.

An email received this week:
Subject: Just in....
> >Dyslexic anti-terrorist troops have surrounded Marks & Spencer in > >Guildford, Surrey after hearing reports that "Bed Linen is located > >on the second floor."

Another one:
Ben    I understand Mr. Gilchrist is to chair a committee to decide the future of Thomas Gillbard School.. Is this not akin to putting the fox in charge of hen house security?.
doug

And the last one, perhaps it should go on the joke page:
Subject: FW: how you can achieve 103%
We have all been to those meetings where someone wants more than 100%. (Hey about those management meetings....) Well here's how you do that.

Here's how you can achieve 103%.
First of all, here's a little math that might prove helpful in the  future. How does one achieve 100% in LIFE?
   Begin by noting the following.

IF: 
A = 1 
B = 2 
C = 3 
D = 4 
E = 5 
F = 6 
G = 7 
H = 8 		 I = 9 
J = 10 
K = 11 
L = 12 
M = 13 
N = 14 
O = 15 
P = 16 
Q =17 		 R = 18 
S =19 
T = 20 
U = 21 
V = 22 
W = 23 
X = 24 
Y = 25 
Z = 26 

Then:  H A R D W O R K = 8+1+18+4+23+15+18+11 = Only 98%
Similarly,
K N O W L E D G E = 11+14+15+23+12+5+4+7+5 = Only 96%
But interesting (and as you'd expect),
A T T I T U D E = 1+20+20+9+20+21+4+5 = 100% ... This is how you achieve 100% in LIFE.
But EVEN MORE IMPORTANT TO NOTE (or REALIZE), is
B U L L S H I T = 2+21+12+12+19+8+9+20 = 103%
So now you know what all those high-priced consultants, upper
management, and motivational speakers really mean when they want to exceed 100%!


To respond to this edition click here

Sunday October 14 2001
no column
just ramblings:


First the results of the poll, "Are you in favour of Identity cards?" and thanks to all who participated.
last week's poll result
and an email
"Ben:
I couldn't find out how to register a comment on the poll form, so I am e-mailing it.
   I am not sure why such a majority of people are against identity cards. We already have passports, driving licenses and health cards that we are
obliged to present to identify ourselves.  The driving license seems to be used for all purposes including getting in bars and accepting registered mail from the post office.  We already have identity cards so what's the big deal?
   In the current circumstances when North America is finally catching up with the rest of the world in realizing that terrorism is real,  it may well help to be able to readily identify people.  I think the main benefit would be to slightly reduce the discrimination against people who don't seem to be "real" Canadians.  I am aware of this particularly
since my son is black and is constantly being harassed for doing "white things"  such as having a job and a nice house and car.  At least if he had an identity card it would show that he was actually born and educated here and plays hockey.    Coincidentally, when he vacationed in Cuba he was picked up for fraternizing with white tourists ( they thought he was Cuban), but when the police saw his passport they were quite happy and even gave him cigars, I guess the Cubans understand the
value of identity cards.
   I had  an identity card when I was a kid, they showed who was English and who was a Nazi paratrooper.  I don't think this bothered anybody. Why are Canadians so uptight about this, does it perhaps show an inherent anti-social quality in our make up?"

This email came in as result of the comments about identity cards last week, All I can say is that I disagree with cards because the real effect of having cards will not be the carrying of them but the consequent demand for them to be produced, by the authorities, which will be more capricious and arbitrary and which makes the writer's point about his son much more poignant.

To counter the above opinion I have taken the liberty of stealing a letter from the Globe and

Mail that sums up my attitude entirely; these cards will used to profile our differences. Years ago when I was rifle shooting competitively one of the more libertarian members of the team was selling bumper stickers during the Soviet invasion of Czechoslovakia, that summed up all of these discussions, "The Czechs registered their guns!" In other words when you get registered and categorised the authorities know who and what to pick up first. Not that it doesn't happen without ID cards (as seen during the FLQ crisis where trade unionists were picked up by the truck load), it just makes it easier.

In the agenda here for the Cobourg Council meeting, which is going to be held at the Northumberland Mall (The Antique Roadshow look out!) there is a spot for comment about the proposed sale of the land on William and Elgin St. (Jubilee Park). As the advertisement, shown below, didn't outline a commentary process I took it upon myself to write a letter here (I can't be at Council meeting anyway) but I do hope that other people will make their comments known on Monday evening.

In a completely different vein of politics, one of the questions asked, of me most often, is "What's the NDP up to these days?" Well if you come to the Cobourg Public Library on Friday night, at 7.15pm, you can find out, meet a whole bunch of nice people and perhaps design and vote on resolutions, if you become members,  that may change the face of the party as we know it.

This week Keith Oliver was in the news again claiming that the Town was out to punish him for taking the final step in his appeal, a motion to appeal the decision of Madame Justice Epstein before a panel of her peers. My comments from a couple of weeks ago are here if you wish to brush up on the issue. However the comments that the "Town wants to punish me" may have some merit and not be the whine of persecution. Let me explain. On a page here (a big image file; may take time to load) there is a copy of the letter McCarthy Tetrault sent to Keith that explains that their (RCCL) total costs (known as "Solicitor and Client" costs) are $64,000 but they are only going to bill him using the "Party and party" rate of costs. Those are approximately 50% of the full costs. Here (another big image file; may take time to load) is a letter written by the Town's lawyer where he is warned that not only is his appeal "improper, unfounded and an abuse of process" and if pursued and lost the Town will seek to recover costs at the "Solicitor and client" rate (100%). Two questions: why is the Town using threatening and abusive language in questioning Mr Oliver's proper use of the process and why has the rate of costs now changed from 40% to 100%?


I spoke to Rick Stinson on Friday about the charge that the Town is billing Mr Oliver for their portion of the court costs when the Town's costs are being paid by Royal Cobourg. he agreed that the Town's costs are being paid by Royal Cobourg but they had to assess costs for payment by someone. Incidentally they assessed Oliver/Zellers costs at 40% of their estimated total. The bill will be passed on to McCarthy Tetrault for  collection.

Local media watch this reports two events. One is that Mr Bill's most fervent fan (the wee trustee) Gordon Gilchrist, wrote a laudatory piece about Bill's writing. Two is that since the editor of the Cobourg Daily Star has been told by more that one person about Mr Bill's propensity to fill his columns with repeats and his email ( note, he did stop for a couple of weeks) he has now started to quote other columnists. I pine for the day he has 100% of his own words in his column.

Good to see that Dalton Camp, of the Toronto Star, was also disgusted by the performance of Andy Rooney that so upset me last week. One good thing, I finally heard some comedians wondering, in a humourous way, about the whereabouts of Dick Cheney so perhaps things are getting back to normal.

To commemorate the first year of office by our illustrious Mayor I have compiled a commentary page. Click here for the assessment of a first time mayor's first year.

 

To respond to this edition click here

Monday October 8 2001

an interesting advertisement in the paper on friday - an ad announcing the sale of a plot of land

advertisement about the sale of Jubilee Park
this is unusual because although it advertises the intention of the Council to sell off the Jubilee Park it does not tell the citizens how they can make comments! This is a new low in participation - telling us what they are going to do but not how to make comments about it. A true example of the rulers telling us what is going on but please don't get on our case for doing it!! I know that I will be writing a letter to Council, I wonder when it will get read? For those interested in contacting council it should be done before the 15th of October

For those of you who are wondering just what we will be giving away in exchange for $36,000 here is a map

Just to recap if you think that selling 1.2 acres of land that will be commercial, in the most prime spot of rabid commercialism for only $126,000 (we only get to keep 28%) is good value I have some land in Florida you may want to look at. For a realistic price just ask Ed Pursey how much he wants for his land next door.
   In the case of the sale of the road allowance, you can only make comments on October 29th if you have land that is being affected. That practically guarantees no public comment. Unless an enterprising group of people calling themselves landowners (we aren't we? we own the Parkland abutting the road allowance) demand to be heard and tell council that they, the public landowners, are not being served well when  half of their park is being given away. All of this being done in the face of a "Gateway Study" that demands more attention be paid to that area.

I have just read the Terms of Reference given to the consultants, (Advisory Services//GPA) who are conducting the latest attempt (The Opportunity Analysis) to get some direction for the economic destiny of the Town. Using the references in the paper I count that this new consultant will be studying eighteen previous studies/papers (18 count 'em), the earliest one being 1989, although the majority were written between '97 and '00. This list of studies begs the questions: will this consultant produce anything other than a rehash and how much have Councils, and NGOs and consultants, spent since 1989 in trying to get a direction, and most importantly why do we need another study? This one will cost $25,000!
   Another interesting situation that will develop in the course of this latest effort is the identification of 24 'key stakeholders'. Now that's an elevation of egos. Who is going to identify these opinions and how will those of us who have opinions feel when the consultants fail to pick us. And how will the consultants deal with the dissenting opinions from the non 24? For my opinion about this process read this week's column here
   What  the readers (we- me and you), should do now is prepare a list of who we think are the key 'stakeholders' (send in your nominations and I will publish them next week) but just for fun, on the other hand let's work backwards, also declare who are not the 'key stakeholders'!  I would not allow near the consultants the leader of any interest group that has less than 15 members no matter how high-fallutin' the group's title is.
   Let's also be balanced, if the Chamber of Commerce is allowed in then the Labour Council has to be too.
  My last observation is; will the process be open to the public?

To comment on the "Attack on America" and its fallout I must tell you all that a new low point was established last night on TV. Last week's column discussed the problem of free speech and its linkage to patriotism, in that context we were treated to the disgusting and unsavoury sight of the icon of outspokenness - Andy Rooney of 60 Minutes - groveling before his corporate masters. For those who didn't see it AR explained the amount of mail that he had received since making some unflattering comments about the conduct of the "War" on the air a week before. With two piles of mail in front of him, a small pile of agreements and a large pile of disagreements, he then proceeded to say that he had been wrong in saying what he had said and publicly apologised. I almost threw up!! I go with Walter Cronkite's quote (on the same programme), "Anybody who doesn't think that people should be expressing differences of opinion about what is going on is wrong, it's just democracy!"

So who's going to sign up for the identity card that pollsters tell us that 80% of the people think is a good idea? Personally I think that there are symbols of a police state and we should recognise them as soon as they are proposed, e.g. indiscriminate and non-essential fingerprinting and DNA collection, and identity cards that have to be produced on demand, and reject them. We already have more than enough types of ID cards: photos on driver licenses, health cards, SINs,  passports etc. We do not need any more powerful symbols. Just use what we have already (some of us think that they (the in use IDs) are even one too many)
   Use the poll below to register your opinion
ID cards
Do you want to carry a National ID card?

Yes
No
Don't care


Current Results


In the vein of the loss of personal liberties a judge in BC has ruled that public surveillance cameras are illegal under most circumstances and should not be used indiscriminately. I wonder how this ruling affects the camera focused on the 'Bronze Man' downtown?

Congratulations to the cyclists who raised $15,000 for the UW.

prize for the most descriptive writing, although in an understated fashion, I have read this week goes to the writer of a match report describing yesterday's rugby match between Reading and Weston-Super-Mare of the English South Western League Division One; "...when Mark Skrypec, in the middle of a driving maul, suddenly let fly on the back of a Weston forward who had grabbed him painfully between the legs. Skrypec got a lecture and the visitors were given a penalty."  I read this because my son plays on the team, wonders of the internet!

September 30th 2001
Column 31 New
ramblings


This week's public meeting
As the mainstream press has not reported this yet here is a report of the public meeting held on Wednesday evening to discuss the consultants' recommendations for changes to Parks and Recreational policies and plans. From what I saw the consultants were lucky to escape with their kneecaps intact. This meeting was not really a public meeting as the public did not formally present their opinions in the traditional way. This was really an open-house. The layout of the meeting was simple; participants were offered at least five large water colour paintings of the proposed changes and asked to comment and make suggestions on a three page paper survey. That means that the presenters are treated a little more gently as opinions are not publicly declared but offered on a one to one basis, with the politicians or staff present or for those with courage, to the consultants, or just by filling out yet more paper. Not being one to hold my opinions in I first tackled Ian Rogers, the erstwhile Town Engineer, and asked him, "Why have we not been presented with an option called 'The Status Quo or None of the Above'?
   This was not a negative or snarky question for I felt that by only being presented with new offerings the public perception was that one of them was inevitable when in fact (I found this out later) most of the audience did not approve of any of the proposals.
   His answer was illuminating, "So how do you propose to deal with the Chateau property?"
   Well Ian, not by spending a whack of money in the rest of the park! So I moved on to the chief consultant and was told that in her expert opinion, "The park is not working and it is deteriorating" Pursuing the point I asked, "Why is the Park deteriorating?" "Lack of maintenance" was the answer. I didn't point out that lack of maintenance may be a problem even if you spend millions on a new Park!
   I did do some questioning of the people in the audience and they were not very positive about the proposals, some were downright hostile. Right at the start of the meeting I had not even got in the door when Bud Barr, of LACAC, jumped on me and demanded, "Ben, who asked for this [the plans]?" When I replied, "Council." He demanded more, "Who on Council?" He had me there, I didn't know. Although when I discussed the proposal with Lloyd Williams I got the distinct impression he was not impressed with the plans and he admitted there are some on Council who are questioning the cost and the extent of the Plan.

The recent Divisional Court ruling
So we now have Justice Madame Epstein's ruling on the Oliver/Zellers appeal and it is option #1 I offered some weeks ago. That is the option that says no to the appeal and in my opinion that is because the alternatives were too dramatic to be implemented. The 15 page ruling, which was a sparse one, certainly was not worth waiting over three months for. There was, in my opinion, more to this than met the eye. See this weeks column for an analysis.   back to the week of October 14
   But in the ruling Madame Epstein did open a new can of worms, that of the citizen's access to the OMB, which is now the subject of an application for a Judicial Review. Stay tuned folks!

A thought for the day
An interesting newsclip makes one think. In the Cobourg Daily Star, where the article extolls the virtues and successes of Thomas Pontiac-Buick (congratulations BTW), one finds the following writing; "Thomas Pontiac-Buick has 35 employees and 15 workers."  The mind boggles  sorting that one out.

Oh what luvverly people we are!
A report from the Monday evening Council meeting would make a diabetic sick! If this was Frank Magazine what happened would have been described as a 'wankfest' but this is a family column so I will say my informants tell me that an orgy of self-congratulatory offerings went on for quite a while. I guess the Mayor started it by saying what a wonderful job all the councillors are doing (it is coming up to the first year mark after all) and then the councillors got up up to say, "it's all your fault, you let us do it!" This was after an earlier display of thanks all round when the delegation from the hospital appeared. So backs patted and arms broken on Monday.

A good day but something's missing
Went downtown on Saturday morning and checked out the "Harvest Festival" As I walked to the end of King St. I realised what was missing this year - the Politician's Corral. If you remember this time last year was election season and the candidates all elected to be put behind ropes, in one place, for public examination. Perhaps as we hear murmurings of disquiet from some of the electorate about lack of progress on certain pet projects (TOOT TOOT goes the whistle) maybe the "politicians corral" ain't such a bad idea! Public accountability in its rawest form.

"He said, She said"
I ran into Katherine Tozer for about two minutes this week just long enough to ask about the apparent dispute between her and our favourite trustee, you know who; Gord (we are not in the busing business) Gilchrist. The dispute for those who missed it is that allegations hurled by the present trustee (I'm not in the busing business, just the education business) that the previous Board was a bunch of profligates and left a huge deficit of millions that is stopping the present Board from doing all kinds of good things (like buying textbooks etc.) were out of line and perhaps untrue. Ms Tozer unleashed a letter to the editor a mile long which said "It wasn't us" and took the wee trustee to task for being a tory hack and toady to government policies. He replied this week repeating his allegations about the deficit so nothing is solved and it comes down to a "He said, She said" debate. So I asked "what about it?" She said "We are both right as the policies we set in place to balance the budget and remove the deficit were never implemented the way we wanted them to be!" She did say she has no intention of replying to the wee trustee.

A thought about last week's column
As I finished last week's column, the feeling that I had stretched a point to make a point came over me. This week's activities proved that the stretched point is close to breaking. The evidence is in; Freedom of Speech is being qualified and doled out according to ideology and patriotism/jingoism. Two cases in the USA: according to  Carol Mott of CFRB, "The Daily Courier" in Nebraska has fired a columnist for describing president Bush as "hiding in a hole" and using the term "Bush skedaddled". and widely reported in the press TV host Bill Maher (Politically Correct) is in danger of losing his show because he questioned US policy and made comments about the people who designed it. Disney and other sponsors have canceled out already. Stay tuned for more of this fascinating and dangerous development and backlash. Interestingly enough the most schizophrenic argument for free speech is occurring on CFRB where the jingocallers are exhorting us all to arms and at the same time defending the right to say it.

Simple Amusement
As you know I have had a dim view of local columnists getting paid to regurgitate their emails in their columns, which are supposed to spark thought and provoke debate - but there is a use for other's material. In the last couple of weeks I have been seeing some good jokes on various pages and consider them to be funny. And as I usually forget jokes I have decided to add a few to a page I have setup just for reference purposes!!! Being an open sort of person I am sharing them with you so click here if you wish to see what makes me laugh these days.

A sight gag
As you know I love the quirky and slightly bawdy and tasteless, so here's one Obviously put together by a person with far too much time on their hands!

To respond to this edition click here