Sand in the Shorts: All Means All, and Other Election Silliness...

By James Phieffer


All:

-the whole number of (used in referring to individuals or particulars, taken collectively): all students. -from dictionary.com

In a scene right out of a Marx Brothers film this week, the following things occurred:

• An All-Candidates meeting was held, for some of the candidates,
• Truman Tuck was criticized for wanting in when he was left out
• Todd Smith was criticized for staying out when he was wanted in,

Some thoughts on this.  First, it appears that certain community organizations and columnists (Chris Mallette – this means you) are still weak on the whole “definition of all” thing.  For them, and anyone else, I have included it at the beginning of the column.  All means all, to use a truism.  When the Affordable Housing Action Network announced, in it's invitations and it's signs, an all-candidates meeting, it made a clear statement – that this was to be a meeting where all of the candidates were invited to participate.  As such, when they excluded three of the seven local candidates, they made themselves liars – purveyors of an untruth.

If they had wished to have a meeting of only certain candidates, which is their right, they should have publicized it – and stated clearly in the invitations to candidates – that this was to be a meeting of specific candidates only.  They certainly have that right, as another columnist pointed out yesterday. But when they used the label of “All-Candidates”, they made a specific statement that this would include all registered candidates.

As to the decisions by Treat Hull (Green) and Todd Smith (Progressive Conservative) not to attend, it seems that Mr. Hull is getting off rather easily.  The focus of commentary has been on Mr. Smith, with the references to Hull being left to “he sent his regrets”.  Smith commented on why he decided not to attend, but left out one point.  Smith decided not to go after hearing that Hull wasn't going to attend, and after considering the need to to other necessary parts of his campaign.  It should be noted that Hull was also a no-show at the Canadian Association of Retired Persons meeting Thursday night.

While I give kudos to the NDP candidate, Sherry Hayes, and the Scarlet-Clad Tooth Fairy (Liberal Leona Dombrowsky) for making both events, the attendance of any candidates at all such meetings during this election will be no small accomplishment.  There are at least 10 of them during the campaign – and talking to Smith I found out from this past Monday to next Thursday, there are eight (8!) of these events.  When the campaign is 30 days long, that is too many to expect the attendance of every candidate at every meeting.

The onus isn't on candidates to attend – the onus needs to be on the multiple special interest groups to get their acts together and merge these into a more reasonable four or five – with one each for North and Central Hastings, and the County, and two for Belleville.  If there is a reasonable number of all-candidates meetings, then, and only then, will it be reasonable to jump up on the nearest soap box and decry a candidate's non-participation.  But as it stands, such criticism of either Smith or Hull is unreasonable.

And if the title is “all-candidates meeting” – make it one.

Sand in the Shorts: "An odd "all-candidates" debate" - Silliness Flies Courtesy Local Housing Group

By James Phieffer


Is the definition of an "All-Candidates" meeting that complex? In light of it being apparently beyond the ken of the Affordable Housing Action Network (AFAN), and after the Canadian Association of Retired People managed to screw up the concept in the last election, maybe it is beyond the abilities of some to understand. Interestingly, in both cases the poor grasp of democratic concepts was a problem for left-wing, or at least anti-conservative, organizations.

Here's the pertinent part of the article from the Intelligencer:

One candidate did more debating off stage than on leading up to what was advertised as an all candidates meeting.

Trueman Tuck, candidate for the People First Republic Party of Ontario, argued while the Affordable Housing Action Network called Wednesday's session an "all-candidates" meeting they had misled the public as only four candidates — those representing the Liberal, New Democratic, Progressive Conservative and Green parties — had been invited to participate in the actual debate.
"They won't let me on the stage. They won't let me speak," Tuck said minutes after arriving at the event and speaking with Gina Cockburn of the network, the hosting agency for the debate at Eastminster United Church.
Cockburn explained the agency had invited only the four candidates due to a systematic approach to the evening.
"We deliberately looked at statistics from the last provincial election and invited those candidates representing the parties that had received the most percentage of the votes," she said. "Unfortunately, only the NDP and Liberal candidates are participating."
Organizers did, in an effort to appease Tuck, permit him to present a three minute introduction but he was not permitted to remain on the stage and could not answer any questions.
Ontario PC candidate Todd Smith, when reached at home Wednesday evening, said while he had decided not to participate because he had learned only two of the seven candidates were planning on participating it was not the main factor in his absence.
"Basically what it came down to is it's a matter of time. We've got two weeks left in this campaign and, no offence to those people who showed up, but there's a lot of work to be done in those next two weeks and I had a lot of things that I needed to do to get caught up," Smith said.
Green candidate Treat Hull, the crowd of roughly 120 people were told, had "sent his regrets" as he was unable to attend the session.

In the comments section I posted the following (it should be made clear that the majority of comments targetted PC candidate Todd Smith's absence):

Sand in the Shorts: Premier Demonstrates Lack of Fiscal Understanding - or Lack of Honesty

By James Phieffer

In the September 21st, 2011 issue of the Belleville Intelligencer, a story appeared concerning the visit of Liberal Leader Dalton McGuinty to Belleville, where he held a campaign event at the Kellogg's plant located in this city. In it, he challenged the Progressive Conservative's labelling of government subsidies as "corporate welfare.

From the article:

[Dalton McGuinty] added the Ontario PC Party refers to such incentives as "corporate welfare" which means many jobs across the province, including those at Kellogg which is expanding by 48 jobs, would not be created. The expansion means Kellogg will add Bran Buds and Kashi Heart to Heart brands to its line of locally-produced products.
"That's just evidence of the partnership that we've been able to strike with all our communities right across the province," McGuinty said. "We have found ways through various programs to partner with our communities and our private sector in order to combine our strengths and create jobs and prosperity." ----- 

Sand in the Shorts: A Horse, a Horse, My Kingdom for a Horse

By James Phieffer

As we pass the one week mark of the provincial election, I'm taking a moment to say I'm sorry to be proven right (so far). Tim Hudak's Liberal-Lite campaign has resulted in the Liberals erasing a ten point PC lead in the last month.

Why? Because Hudak has given Ontarians no reason whatsoever to vote Progressive Conservative rather than Liberal.

Locally, the PC's have a strong candidate in Todd Smith, although he is up against the Scarlet-clad Tooth Fairy (aka Leona Dombrowsky), a skilled campaigner and someone who has a strong base in Belleville. But he is being wasted as the PC deep thinkers allow themselves to be distracted by the insignificant story of the week. Add to that the “foreign workers” idiocy of week one, and the question has to be asked – whose running this circus?

This is still a winnable election, and as the old saw goes, “there's only one poll that counts”.

But for October 6 to be a good day for the PC's, and for the province as a whole, there has to be a change in how the Hudak campaign is run.

“A horse. A horse, my kingdom for a horse...”

The weak, flea-bitten glue piles that Hudak has tried to ride to victory thus far now need to be put down for good. There are plenty of strong steeds an able prince might ride.

In memory: Lokomotiv Yaroslavl

Wade Belak, Rick Rypien and Mental Illness: Sometimes You Lose the War...

Belak clowns with former teammate Dan Hamhuis during the 2011 playoffs. (picture courtesy of The Post)

By James Phieffer - from TheHockeyWriters.com

I was deeply saddened to hear of the death of Wade Belak. I didn’t know him, but when I heard he had taken his own life, I realized I understood him.

Suicide is the most extreme symptom of mental illness. And that is something I know, having dealt with it since my teenage years. I understand where he was, because I’ve been there, and remain here only by the grace of God. As to why he isn’t, that is a question which I don’t know the answer to.

I was looking at some biographies of Mr Belak as I began writing this. He sounded like a great guy. A proud father of two daughters, husband to Jennifer. A man who was as renowned for his easygoing sense of humour off the ice as for his intimidating physical presence on it. While his on ice hockey career was done, he had a position with the Nashville Predators organization. Externally, at least, he had it all.

But something that must be understood about mental illness is that it is an invisible illness. While such serious physical illnesses as cancer or muscular dystrophy show themselves through various physical symptoms, the symptoms of mental illness are mostly hidden inside.

So the only way you’ll know if the person you work with, that you meet on the street, or watch on the ice or ball diamond is dealing with any form of mental illness is if they share the fact with you. But as advanced as we think our society to be, mental illness is a handicap that is too often misunderstood, and occasionally discriminated against.

When I read the story about Belak’s passing this inability, or at times disinterest, in understanding mental illness was brought to the fore by some comments which were critical of Belak for abandoning his family through his suicide, as if he made a conscious, rational decision to do so. From my own experience, responses to finding out that I deal with mental illness (depression and anxiety) vary from questioning my mental capabilities and sanity to a pejorative view, where any accomplishments are deserving of a pat on the head (“i.e. that’s so nice, someone like you doing that…”). And the latter is almost as bad as the former.

The inability of people to understand mental illness also has manifested itself in some of the commentary surrounding the deaths of Belak and Rick

Rick Rypien (Wikimedia Commons)

Rypien (and Derek Boogard, although I have not seen anything to indicate his death was caused by mental illness). Too many columnists have used these tragedies to move forward anti-fighting agendas, assuming that too many blows to the head have caused irreparable damage, leading to suicides.

Is it possible that injuries sustained in fights played a role in the lead up to these tragedies? That may never be known. But to assume this is the case is to use his death as a tool to move forward a particular agenda – and in this case one which distracts from what can be seen to be fact – not just supposition.

So let’s deal with a few facts, from the Canadian Mental Health Association:

• Suicide accounts for 24% of all deaths among 15-24 year olds, and 16% among those from 25 to 44.
• More than half a million persons aged 15 and over (2.2%) reported having activity limitations due to emotional, psychological or psychiatric conditions. An additional 1.8% had activity limitations due to frequent memory problems or periods of confusion.
• Stress and mental health-related problems currently represent 40-50% of the short-term disability claims among employees of some of Canada’s largest corporations.
• The Canadian economy loses an estimated $30 billion a year in productivity due to mental illness and addiction problems.

While mental illness is becoming better understood, and as a result persons such as myself are able to go public with our battles, more needs to be

done. There need to be support services available with lower wait times. Employers need to commit to treating those dealing with mental illness in as open and considerate a manner as has become common – and expected – for those who deal with physical disabilities.

And people need to realize that mental illness does not mean a person is insane, broken, loony, or whatever other derogatory term has been directed at the mentally ill over the years. We are people who seek to live whole and productive lives. We have aims and goals. And we are capable of making major contributions to society at all levels.

But sometimes we lose battles. And sadly, occasionally we lose the war.

Wade Belak, from everything written and said about him by those who knew him, was an exemplary human being, a gentle giant who, while intimidating on the ice, was recognized by children as a good soul. To see his life ended this way is truly sad. Two little girls now go to bed without their Daddy. His wife is left to deal with the fallout, the questions. His parents have experienced that most painfully absurd of situations – outliving their child.

To them, my thoughts and prayers are with you, as are I’m sure those of the many Canadians who struggle with mental illness every day.

Mike Flanagan, a former star pitcher for the Baltimore Orioles and Toronto Blue Jays, took his own life August 24, 2011

The Wobbly Puck: We Seek the Holy Grail...

By James Phieffer - first published at The Hockey Writers

As much as I’m sure this is an exciting time for hockey fans and media alike, it is also, I expect, a time when the muscles which surround the eyes of coaches, general managers, and other hockey front office staff get a workout. After all, with each column they read, every fan comment posted after hockey articles of one sort or another, I’m sure the eyes begin to roll.

My last column was a well argued (eye-roll) explanation of what the Senators ought to be doing on their blue line this season in order to build for the future(eye-roll). “All you have to do is…” I wrote, laying out a comprehensive plan for integrating young players while using the now surplus (eye-roll) veterans to secure valuable assets (major eye-roll) useful in building a contender in the coming years. My plan is very simple and straightforward (eye rolls completely over and pops out of head).

I always get a laugh when I read comments on seemingly any story about the Toronto Maple Leafs. While I haven’t checked in the last couple of months, in the last 12 months I have seen more than one suggestion by a commenting fan that “we need to bring back Dougie” (Gilmour) or “Clarkie” (Wendel Clark). Now, after I stop laughing, make sure I haven’t wet myself, and restrain myself from making another derogatory comment about some Leafs fans to the Missus (a Leafs fan…), I wonder about what people are thinking.

I sat beside Doug Gilmour about a year ago. I had taken my nephew Matthew to see the Belleville Bulls play the visiting Kingston Frontenacs. Matt and I had front row seats, and were right across the tunnel from the visiting teams bench, where stood the coach of the Fronts, one Douglas Robert Gilmour, or “Dougie”, in Leaf-speak. He was in a suit, not equipment, and in light of his being about eight years older than my then current age of 39, this seemed unlikely to change. I am sure Brian Burke has just broken down at the news. He’ll have to see if Sundin’s agent is still on speed-dial. Then to let the mayor know he can start planning the Stanley Cup parade route…

But I digress.

Right now, Bryan Murray, Percival to Eugene Melnyk’s Arthur, is trying to assemble a team which will succeed in capturing hockey’s mystical Grail as soon as is humanly possible. But he has no Merlin or Lady of the Lake, nor can he look to Melnyk for anything resembling Excalibur. He did have to trade away a guy who thought he was Excalibur, but Dany Heatley is looking more and more like one of those pseudo-Samurai swords you can find in cheap head shops – if you use them for anything stronger than paper, they get dull and useless in a hurry.

Meanwhile, we, the ink-stained pseudo-Merlins of the hockey’s Camelot, provide our wisdom. We give forth elixirs promising a chemistry never before seen on a single line, let alone throughout a dressing room. We anoint one player after another as the next Bedivere. And yet all too often he turns out to be more of a Sir Robin*.

So, as I turn back to my usual job of making coaches’ lives easier, and demonstrating how simple is the lot of a general manager, in direct contradiction of the rest of this column, I wish all those in actual positions of power throughout hockey a good season, and the forbearance not to strangle the next reporter they see on sight.

Sir Robin? No, just Dany Heatley...

* – from Monty Python and the Holy Grail:

Brave Sir Robin ran away. Bravely ran away, away! When danger reared its ugly head, He bravely turned his tail and fled. Yes, brave Sir Robin turned about And gallantly he chickened out. Bravely taking to his feet He beat a very brave retreat, Bravest of the brave, Sir Robin!

He is packing it in and packing it up And sneaking away and buggering up And chickening out and pissing off home, Yes, bravely he is throwing in the sponge…

Sand in the Shorts: The Race to Succeed Jack Layton

By James Phieffer - also published in the August 27, 2011 Intelligencer

Whatever else one might say of Jack Layton, he was a key part of the New Democratic Party going from also ran status when he took over as leader in 2003 to being the official opposition party in 2011. And even as he is laid to rest, his own wish that a leadership convention be held in January leads to the question of who might replace him.

The candidates will gradually start to appear over the next month, some sooner, some later, depending on issues such as funding and support within caucus and throughout the membership. A key area of support too will be labour, as provided for under the NDP's constitution. Since others are addressing the question of who, I will focus more on what the NDP should, and shouldn't, be looking for.

First, not Libby Davies. The NDP's lunatic fringe might be a bastion of reliable votes, but the leadership of the party cannot come from here. Davies has embarrassed herself before with anti-Israel remarks and statements, up to the point a couple of years ago when she questioned the Jewish nation's right to exist. Davies or any other leader from this group would destroy the NDP's credibility with mainstream Canadians and doom it to a quick return to fringe party status.

Thomas Mulcair ruled himself out when he made his mind-numbingly stupid comments questioning the veracity of US President Barack Obama's statement that Osama bin Laden was dead. Well, bin Laden was pushing up flowers, and so should any realistic chance that Mulcair might end up leading the NDP.

What the NDP needs to find isn't a Layton clone. Instead, they need to seek out a leader who is capable of controlling the party's left while putting forward the NDP as a party aspiring towards the centre. Essentially, they need a leader known and active in NDP circles who has demonstrated an attractiveness to current Liberal and Green voters.

So, who do I think should be in the mix?

Consider, if you will, Lorne Calvert and Gary Doer. Both are former NDP premiers, who were able to attract votes from areas of their provinces where the federal representation was Liberal or Conservative. Both have demonstrated many of the skills necessary for an NDP leader who aspires to broaden the party's appeal. Doer in particular was known for getting along with Prime Minister Stephen Harper when he was premier. These should both be considered for the party leadership.

And I'll throw out three interesting (but not necessarily likely) possibilities:

First, MP Megan Leslie, who has experience in areas such as the environment. She's young and has a good reputation as on of the NDP's “veteran” (she was first elected in 2008) MP’s.

Peter Stoffer should run. He has perhaps the best potential to lead the NDP into government, as he is known for his populist and pragmatic streak. He has the potential to win over non-traditional NDP voters with his combination of affability and lack of ideological drive. Simply, he won't scare them.

Finally, how about Bill Blaikie? The retired long time MP and runner up for the NDP leadership brings a strong reputation to go with that powerful voice. He is respected both inside the party as well as outside it. He too should run.

So grab the popcorn and beverage of choice, as this ought to be interesting.

Sand in the Shorts: Good Jack Will Be Missed

By James Phieffer - also published in the Intelligencer (Tuesday August 23, 2011)

"I'm going to fight cancer now so I can be back to fight for families when Parliament resumes."

That line says it all: Jack Layton was a fighter. He was also a good and caring man.

Known as someone with a pragmatic side, he was willing to work toward compromise if that would help his constituents.

It was this pragmatism that has allowed him to enjoy the success he has had as the leader of the New Democratic Party.

Mr. Layton came from a political family, from his father, Robert Layton, who served in the government of Brian Mulroney, all the way back to his Great-Grand Uncle, William Steeves, a Father of Confederation from New Brunswick, and later a Liberal Senator.

He was very active in political affairs as a youth in Quebec, and later involved himself in local politics after he moved to Toronto.

More about his biography will be printed over the coming days; what I wish to consider is the impact he had on Parliament Hill.

Jack Layton was an optimist, according to those who knew him, and that optimism was evident in how he approached his work.

This was part of how he impacted the NDP, as the party became a voice for optimism and possibilities.

He saw possibilities in a province that had only elected one NDP MP in its history, leading the party to a Quebec landslide in the 2011 general election when the NDP took 59 of 75 seats.

It was as much a victory for Jack Layton as it was the NDP. Across the province, unknown 'placeholder' candidates were elected, with the majority of votes being cast for Jack Layton. They didn't know who their candidate was, but they liked Jack.

His "Orange Crush" victory also swept aside the separatist Bloc Quebecois, something for which all Canadians should thank him.

Jack Layton was both a man of principle but also a pragmatist. There are stories about his time on Toronto City Council, where he brought together disparate points of view to form a workable, but principled, compromise.

He demonstrated his hold to his principles in matters such as his opposition to Toronto's bid for the 1996 Olympics as part of the "Bread, Not Circuses" coalition. This may have helped defeat him when he later ran for mayor of Toronto.

I was not a supporter of Jack Layton. He and I stood on different sides of a multitude of issues. But there is no question I respected him then, as I do his legacy now.

He helped build the NDP into a vital party in Ottawa, ensuring Canada has that which is essential to any democracy — a strong opposition.

He believed in standing up for those who could not stand up for themselves. He was a proud Canadian.

Maybe the best way to summarize Jack Layton is to use the words of popular Quebec television host Guy A. LePage. After having him on his show, Tout le monde en parle, he called him "un bon Jack" - good Jack.

He will be missed.

Sand in the Shorts: How you know your dog doesn't like a certain type of dog food...

By James Phieffer

We ran out of the (somewhat) expensive dog food for Holly a day ago, so I was feeding her the cheap store brand stuff. That is, I'd put it in her bowl, and she'd nibble a bit - but this morning, I found a bit of the good stuff and put it into her bowl, and then topped up the bowl with cheap stuff. She proceeded to dig out the good stuff, leaving the cheap stuff behind.

Later on, it hit me.

This dog, which was turning up her nose at the cheap dog food, has to be kept out of the bathroom so she doesn't eat cat poop out of Sammie's litter box.

So, apparently, cat crap tastes better than the cheap dog food.

Holly back in February 2011

Sand in the Shorts: Potshots for August 20, 2011

By James Phieffer - also published in the Intelligencer (August 20, 2011)

There are a few matters that ought to be addressed this week, but only one column. So take cover, do-ers of dumb – I'm going to take a few potshots.

• Gerry Fraiberg, a local Liberal lapdog, was kind enough to offer his condemnation of local Progressive Conservative candidate, and former co-worker, Todd Smith's lack of moral backbone for having decided putting food on the table for his family is more important than meeting the needs of local Liberal mouthpieces. His actions are entirely within the letter and spirit of the law.
  Let's consider the amount of free (that is, on the taxpayers' dime) publicity being had by Leona Dombrowsky, and other Liberals, as she flutters about, a scarlet clad, tax-powered, tooth fairy. Here and there she leaves a few million under someone's pillow, bringing smiles to all. And what has this gained our local sugar-mama? A search of the Intelligencer shows her name coming up in 31 stories since Smith threw announced his candidacy. In the same time Smith's name comes up 9 times.
  In fact, the real advantage lays with Dombrowsky and other incumbents, who are on a taxpayer covered holiday, able to campaign 24/7 while their paycheques keep rolling in. I'm sure Smith would like to have that opportunity.
• Apparently certain members of the local left have decided that the best way to deal with issues of poverty and homelessness is to make those in that situation more comfortable. That's the idea put forth in some comments on various articles in the Intell this week. Their first criticism of bringing more development to Belleville is to focus on the need for “social development”. When it came to the Memorial Arena's fate, the suggestion was it become a homeless shelter and soup kitchen, since it's located so near to transit and entertainment, and “there are benches in the square where occupants could congregate”.
  Now I have no problem with making sure there are adequate resources available to help the poor and homeless, but I believe the best goal is the elimination of homelessness and increasing the income of the poor. This won't be accomplished by such ideas. And the idea of Market Square as a hang-out for local panhandlers should give downtown merchants a coronary.
  What downtown needs isn't a Toronto sized shelter, but new, quality, residential development. A highrise apartment or condominium on the site, possibly incorporating much of the Memorial Arena, would bring money to the city, creating quality jobs, and increasing the tax base so as to allow funds for aiding those who are down on their luck.
• Apparently the McGuinty-Dombrowsky government's Samsung deal is proving to be a hard pill to swallow for taxpayers, based on the discussion of the deal in local media across the province. In Belleville, a Samsung spokesperson took the time to write a “neutral” letter to the editor of the Intelligencer to provide us with “facts” on the most most grotesque example of politically motivated corporate welfare in provincial history.
  While the government loans to GM and Chrysler were bigger (combining federal and provincial) there was a concrete return (in the form of jobs) on that investment, not to mention the loans are currently being paid back and the balance became equity in the companies. The Samsung deal represents hoped for jobs from one manufacturer. A more sensible approach would be a reduction in business costs, such as taxes, which can be a hindrance for the creation of jobs and the growth of the small to medium sized enterprises which are the driving force behind current employment growth.
  As far as economic far-sightedness is concerned, this deal shows the Liberals possess none. The government's job isn't to pick the business' that will (hopefully) be the winners. Rather, it's job is to create a healthy business environment, which means jobs for Ontarians.

Sand in the Shorts: Time for Tim to Stop Being Dalton

By James Phieffer - also published in the August 13th, 2011 Intelligencer

Okay, Tim.

You've had your laugh. We're all LOL'ing at your wicked impression of Dalton McGuinty. It's time to quit kidding around, and start acting like a conservative again.

I was looking at the PC's “changebook”, and I at first thought I'd gone to the NDP site. Come on, really – the best you can do is a deficit in 2015-16 that is only $600 million less than the Liberal plan? How is this a truly conservative budget?

Sure, there's the planned $3 billion cut in taxes – a good start. But where are the meaningful cuts in provincial government spending that's increased over 90% since the 2003 election? Where's the plan to cut government down to a more manageable size, to stabilize healthcare spending by implementing new funding models and experimenting with the provision of some services by the private sector, with OHIP simply paying the bill, as most insurance plans do.

Where's the determination to cut spending by a certain amount – say 5-10% total - or to implement a salary freeze for government employees (subject to contracts coming up for renegotiation).

Where is the intent to break free of the failing welfare state model, and rebuild the government to meet the needs of the 21^st century? We saw the Liberal concept of this, which involved closing privately run licence bureaus in Belleville and elsewhere, replacing them with longer lines at the local Service Ontario office – combined here with a dearth of parking. How this helped anything is beyond me, but it did help increase costs and lower the level of service.

Tim, you have a chance to chart a course back to fiscal sanity and governmental competence. You can be the man who sets the agenda, forcing the Liberals to fight a battle of ideas – and that's an area where the left tends to bring knives to gunfights.

Sand in the Shorts: Talkin' 'Bout A Revolution

By James Phieffer - an edited version appears in the August 6, 2011 Intelligencer

Okay. It's time now for me to offend the numerous, or at least noisy (suggesting they may be more numerous than they are) sans-culottes who fill the local media with their screams of fury at the idea of (cover the ears of your children) DEVELOPMENT.

Yes, I've said the word, because it is a good idea. Indeed, it is a necessary idea, if the city is to progress while providing the services and quality of life which are key to what makes Belleville the great place to live it is. We have in this city a beautiful waterfront, which should be a drawing card for people who have money, and are willing to spread it about in exchange for a room with a view.

An example of how this works can be seen in Kingston, where a drive along the waterfront near their downtown reveals many new high-rise condominiums. These are, one would expect, populated by people who spend a large amount of money in Kingston's downtown, the result of which is a downtown which is alive and vibrant – a downtown which is a model of what Belleville's could, and should, be.

Now, I'm sure the local Luddites are strongly inhaling in order to begin screaming at the top of their lungs about this sacrilege I've proposed. They will possibly start with a sensible concern (protection of park space) and then move on to the progressively more insane concerns, most of which will involve the fact we haven't done this before, or that it would be “inappropriate” development for the city. And, of course, the online critics who usually hang their hats on conspiracies flowing from assorted neo-Conservative entities will be at it as always.

Now, I cannot deal with the concerns of the local enrages, as they generally relate to zoning issues within their minds, but I can deal with the one very legitimate concern – that our waterfront would cease to be an area available to be enjoyed by the entirety of our citizenry as well as those who choose to visit.

Sand in the Shorts: Turmoil for Turmel

It's a tough blow for the NDP to face a new day with their leader, the one who led them to an unexpected breakthrough in Quebec and unprecedented popularity nationally, on the sidelines fighting a deadly illness. While all Canadians, NDP or not, are focused on the health of a man fighting for his life, there are undoubtedly questions going through the minds of the members of the party he leads.

The past election was, for the NDP, a triumph of the leader over the party. Jack Layton is the face of the party, particularly in Quebec, and a record number of Canadians decided they liked that face. While veteran MP’s were key to the victories in their own ridings, outside of these victory was all about Jack. In Quebec, the complete absence of a locally known candidate generally proved irrelevant. Quebec loved Jack, and threw their votes at him, roses for the torero who slew the Bloc Quebecois.

But with that triumph of personality comes the risk that, without Layton front and centre, the support will wane. Fortunately, this isn't an immediate concern as the next election won't be until fall 2015, and hopefully Layton returns as planned THIS fall.

Regardless, with Layton trying to move the NDP closer to the political centre, Ms. Turmel's background seems rather “old school” leftist to be put in charge of the party. This is particularly true now, when a caucus made up of newly-minted MP’s needs to coalesce into a real party, capable of demonstrating to Canadians that it is a government-in-waiting, and a moderate one at that.

Ms. Turmel has spent the major part of her life involved in public sector unions, finishing as National President of the Public Service Alliance of Canada. She is currently the Opposition critic for Public Works and Governmental Services, which already seems a little like the fox guarding the henhouse. Putting her in place as interim leader is another thing entirely. While there is no question she can, and will, oppose the government, can she do it wisely? If she turns out to be a shill for government unions, she'll win little support for the NDP in new territories.

If Layton is not able to return by the beginning of the new session in the Commons, it will leave Turmel to take the floor during Question Period. Having listened to her, she does not have the speaking, and more specifically English, skills expected of a leader. The image Canadians form of our politicians is, rightly or wrongly, based on the few minutes we see of them each night on TV – the majority of which comes from Question Period. It's not to say she can't develop these skills – look at Stephen Harper, who had to learn French in the wake of becoming Conservative Party leader – but at a point where Canadians may be open to seeing a rejuvenated NDP in a new light, time isn't necessarily on her side.

For the NDP, they have Quebec, and need to win over voters elsewhere. In that mission, Jack Layton is crucial – and Ms. Turmel is in over her head

Sand in the Shorts: Duncan's Dough Nuts

By James Phieffer - this appeared on July 22, 2011 Intelligencer

I want to thank Ontario Liberal Minister of Finance Dwight Duncan. This week he set Ontarians straight by educating us on the provinces prosperity and growth under the Liberals.

“I mean we are the head to most large Canadian corporations, we have the largest labour force, we have the fastest growing economy. So it is completely dishonest to use that term ‘have-not’. It’s intellectually dishonest and factually dishonest.” Thus spoke Duncan.

I'm appreciative of Mr. Duncan's information. Truly it was enlightening for a member of the unwashed masses such as myself, who due to a lack of such knowledge might be inclined to see the $2.2 billion being given to Ontario through transfer payments as a sign of economic illness. Because of what he said, I can rest easy, knowing that the fact that Ontario stands 7^th or worse in per capita gross domestic product (GDP - 7^th as of 2008 according to Stats Can) is evidently a sign of economic strength.

Mr Duncan is right. Comparing Ontario's GDP per capita ($45,194) to that of Newfoundland and Labrador ($62,566) is irrelevant. It would be like comparing China's economy to that of Canada – the Chinese is immensely larger. The fact the individual Chinese citizen is much poorer is of no importance. It's size that matters.

And Ontario has size. The economy of Ontario makes up 37.86% of the Canadian economy as a whole. That just lends more credence to Mr. Duncan's statement. Besides, how significant can it be that while the population of Ontario grew it's share of GDP dropped.

Ontario is in good hands. Just ask the Liberals. Ontarians pay less in taxes than they did in 2003, since the Liberals dropped the lowest tax rate by a fraction of a percentage point. After all, the $800 per person healthcare fee isn't a tax, really. And you can't count the HST – even though where other provinces ended up with a lower combined rate, Ontario kept the additional funds generated by extending the provincial sales tax to previously non-taxable services.

Don't forget that Mr. Duncan has a plan to eliminate the deficit by 2017-18. All he has to do is hold down spending growth to 1% annually and promoting “principled and sustainable federal-provincial fiscal arrangements”.

I'm sure the 1% growth in spending target is easily attainable. After all, it's not like the Liberals just gave pay increases of 2% a year or greater to a number of unions, some secretly, some not, over the next three or four years. And the federal government is sure to want to enter into “principled and sustainable federal-provincial fiscal arrangements” that basically give the Ontario government more taxpayers money.

So sit back and relax, citizens of Ontario. Ignore the Conservatives, with their complaints and suggestions of economic incompetence. After all, it's not like Ontario was Canada's economic powerhouse when they were in government...