This week, the legislation that originally created the Canada Pension Plan (CPP) will turn 50 years old. The stated purpose of the Canada Pension Plan was to ensure all working Canadians have an opportunity to retire in dignity. It builds on basic Old Age Security to achieve greater social justice linked to progress in the economy. But Canada has big challenges to face in the immediate future if we're to honour Lester Pearson's ambition of a fair, efficient, adequate system of retirement income for all Canadians.
A report released today by the University of Victoria's Environmental Law Centre calls for sweeping reform of Canadian charitable law in line with other jurisdictions such as the U.S., Australia, New Zealand and England. Current rules around "political activity" are confusing and create an "intolerable state of uncertainty," the report says.
Indeed, further restraint on compensation spending would help ease the pressure on Ontario's finances. Ensuring that the wages and benefits of provincial government workers are in line with private sector norms for similar positions would be a good first step towards getting things right.
A federal election could be called any time in the next few months, judging by the media coverage and the ramping up of political activity. Many issues have been crowding into the media headlines in anticipation of the election -- but with a notable absence of any consideration of healthcare by our political parties. Apparently the subject is still on the minds of the electorate though, at least amongst my own circle of friends, colleagues and neighbours, many of whom note the leading edge of our baby-boomers have now turned 65.
I believe that Canadians see the strength of our shared diversity. Individuals like the young women who took to Twitter with #DressCodePM to express their displeasure with the idea of undue restrictions on religious expression, or fashion, remind me of that. As a father of two daughters I know the kind of Canada that I want my children to grow up in
This week, Veterans Affairs Canada (VAC) announced a proposed benefit of $7,238 for family members caring for severely ill or injured veterans. You'd think Jenifer Migneault, the wife of a man who suffers from PTSD, would be celebrating. But she's not. Migneault does not think cash is the solution. She wants a program that trains family-turned-caregivers to live with PTSD. "I can have all the money in the world," she told CBC in reaction to the caregiver benefit. "But if I don't have a quality of life, this money doesn't serve anything."
Bill C-51 is an omnibus anti-terrorism bill that grants CSIS new information sharing powers and converts CSIS from a covert intelligence gathering organization to a covert enforcement agency. Ms. Soapbox is here to offer four simple suggestions to keep you out of trouble when Stephen Harper's majority government finally passes this monstrous piece of legislation.
The risks and costs associated with climate change are already mounting--ice storms, severe flooding, crop losses, damage to critical infrastructure, $3.2 billion in extreme weather related Canadian insurance costs in 2013 alone. Yet, the climate crisis is rarely talked about at Queen's Park. The lone exception is Ontario's Environmental Commissioner Gord Miller, who has stirred up controversy with reports pointing out that Ontario has no plan to meet its 2020 or 2050 greenhouse gas (GHG) reduction targets.
It is actually five bills rolled into one. Each part contains provisions I can only describe as dangerous. It is more than anti-terrorism, as the range of activities covered by a new and sweeping definition of "threats to the security of Canada" in the information sharing section of the bill covers far more than terrorism. It could plausibly cover just about anything, and certainly would cover those opposing pipelines and tankers.
The scale of information sharing being proposed by Bill C-51 is unprecedented, the scope of the new powers conferred by the Act is excessive, particularly as these powers affect ordinary Canadians, and the safeguards protecting against unreasonable loss of privacy are seriously deficient. While the potential to know virtually everything about everyone may well identify some new threats, the loss of privacy is clearly excessive. All Canadians would be caught in this web.
Our own Steve Anderson has been invited to testify before the committee and share our community's concerns about C-51 with key decision makers. We know that when we speak out together with one voice we can change the government's mind. That's why we need your help right now.
You don't ignore a mandate from the Supreme Court. But that seems to be the initial response from the Conservative government to the recent Carter decision on assisted suicide. The Supreme Court has given the government one year to draft legislation and yet after a short one-day debate in the House on the issue the Conservative response has been surprisingly laissez-faire. They have done nothing in response other than to have some back benchers complain that the court is being unreasonable and that the government needs more time.
MP Larry Miller, who once used Hitler and the Nazis as references to oppose the gun registry, also recently made a dumb comment about how prospective Canadians should "stay the hell where you came from" if they prefer to wear a niqab during a Canadian citizenship ceremony. He is one of a long line of Conservative MPs to make racist remarks. I hope racism, ignorance and stupidity are not becoming mainstream Canadian values, let alone values endorsed by the Conservative Party of Canada. I hope the Prime Minister understands in his awkward silence, he is giving the impression that he is actually endorsing all the ills we have seen from members of his caucus in recent months. He should not.
Ebola has infected nearly 24,000 people and killed almost 10,000, mainly in Guinea, Liberia, and Sierra Leone. However, the impacts of Ebola extend far beyond the borders of the worst-affected countries. G7 Foreign Ministers should champion a rigorous approach to go beyond reducing transmission, to stopping the disease completely, to enabling societies to manage the consequences of the outbreak, and to preventing future outbreaks.
My name is Faisal Kutty. I am a lawyer, law professor, public speaker and writer. I write in response to testimony to your distinguished Committee on February 23, 2015 by a fear monger well-versed in McCarthyism, Mr. Marc Lebuis.In my opinion, Mr. Lebuis and Pointe de Bascule hold anti-Muslim, anti-Islam views. Often unable to identify real threats, they insulting law-abiding Canadians through innuendo and mischaracterization of tenuous or even non-existent links and associations.
Lest we forget, the fact that Canada's black recent political biographies, for the most part, have come via political anointments rather than community organizations. As blacks, we are often too enthusiastic to celebrate Obama's biography in community organizations yet have neglected to follow in his footsteps.
Perhaps there is an element to which the Conservatives truly believe they are fighting a cultural and religious practice that they find repugnant. Even still, that seems far beyond the point, as has been stated many times by various commentators: a conservative man forcing a woman not to wear a niqab is effectively the same violation of her liberty as a conservative man forcing her to wear the niqab. What could be more Canadian than including someone's harmless religious practices in a citizenship ceremony, or really any other facet of public life?
On February 12, Harper vowed to appeal a federal court ruling that would allow Muslim women to wear a niqab during citizenship ceremonies. Speaking to the press about the matter, Harper said, "That is not the way we do things." He added that, "This is a society that is transparent, open and where people are equal, and I think we find that offensive." This is a classic example of opportunistic feminism, which so many white men like to make use of from time to time.
There are already some technical experts suggesting you use duress passwords that wipe your device, but I would not recommend that -- that could have negative affects if you are considered to be tampering with evidence, or obstruction. I suggest you are better off in a position where you do not know your password, or exercise silence if in Canada.