Canadian Government to Stop Illegal Spying

Stop Illegal Spying – Case Details

BCCLA Sues Canadian Government to Stop Illegal Spying
On October 22, 2013, the BCCLA filed a lawsuit against the  Communications Security Establishment Canada (CSEC) claiming that its  secret and unchecked surveillance of Canadians is unconstitutional. The BCCLA’s lawsuit calls on the government to state clearly who they  are watching, what is being collected and how they are handing  Canadians’ private communications and information. The BCCLA filed the  case because we believe that secret and unrestrained government  surveillance presents a grave threat to democratic freedoms.

The BCCLA’s lawsuit is the first challenge to the legality of CSEC’s spying programs.
CSEC’s Operations Infringe Canadians’ Rights
The BCCLA’s lawsuit argues that two aspects of the CSEC’s operations  violate the Charter’s protections against unreasonable search and  seizure: the interception of the private communications of Canadians and  the sweeping collection of metadata information produced by Canadians.

By law, CSEC is permitted to read Canadians’ emails and text  messages, and listen to Canadians’ phone calls, whenever a Canadian is  communicating with a person outside Canada. CSEC also operates under a  secret ministerial directive that allows it to collect and analyze the  metadata information that is automatically produced each and every time a  Canadian uses a mobile phone or accesses the internet.

There is no court or committee that monitors the CSEC’s interception  of these private communications and metadata information, and there is  no judicial oversight of its sweeping powers. CSEC’s operations are  shrouded in secrecy.
The BCCLA filed this lawsuit to force the government to enact specific safeguards to protect the rights of all Canadians.

Re-blog of Nov 2013

Bank of Nova Scotia has been accused of conspiracy

HSBC, Deutsche Bank and Canada's Bank of Nova Scotia have been accused of conspiring to fix the price of silver in a US lawsuit filed in federal court in New York.

Plaintiff Scott Nicholson, an investor from the northwestern US state of Washington, said the three banks had "abused" their position to rig silver prices to the detriment of investors, according to the suit.

"The extreme level of secrecy creates an environment that is ripe for manipulation," Nicholson's lawsuit, seen by AFP on Saturday, alleges.

"Defendants have a strong financial incentive to establish positions in both physical silver and silver derivatives prior to the public release of silver fixing results, allowing them to reap large illegitimate profits."

The lawsuit accuses the three banks of malpractice stretching back to January 1 2007.

Contacted by AFP, HSBC and Deutsche Bank declined to comment. Bank of Nova Scotia was not immediately available for comment.

Nicholson is hoping other investors who feel they may have been wronged will come forward in order to launch a class-action lawsuit.

Deutsche Bank, HSBC and Bank of Nova Scotia set benchmark prices for silver once every day during a conference call.

The benchmark is used by central banks to assess the value of metals, impacting the price of jewelry as well as revenues from mining companies.

Deutsche Bank had already announced earlier this year it plans to withdraw from the system used to set benchmarks, citing a reduction of involvement in commodities.

Banking sources believe the lawsuit will be dismissed, pointing to a 2013 investigation by the US Commodity Futures Trading Commission.

According to sources, the CFTC probe found no evidence of wrongdoing and concluded that precious metal pricing was conducted transparently.

However the New York lawsuit comes against a backdrop of several legal disputes involving large banks.

In March, an individual filed a suit in New York including five banks - Societe Generale, HSBC, Barclays, Deutsche Bank and Bank of Nova Scotia -- of manipulating gold prices for their advantage.

Germany's Federal Financial Supervisory Authority (BAFIN) has also been probing potential price manipulation of gold and silver in London.

Other banks are meanwhile being investigated for possible manipulation of the Libor and Euribor interbank lending rates. Investigations are ongoing in several countries.

USA -Fast food strikes have raised wages for millions



VILLA PARK, Illinois – Thousands of low-wage workers from around the United States convened Friday in a Chicago suburb and kicked off the first-ever national fast food strikers’ convention. They were greeted by the president of one of America’s largest unions, who brought a message of unity to the burgeoning fast food workers’ movement.
“Tonight, I want you to know that 2 million SEIU workers have your back and are standing with you,” said Service Employees International Union president Mary Kay Henry. Her union, which claims to represent about 2.1 million workers, has long been a backer of the fast food strikes.
The convention’s itinerary for Friday night, including Henry’s speech, represented something of a victory lap for striking fast food workers. Since November 2012, the movement has ballooned from about 200 workers in one American city to thousands of workers across the country.

The most recent strike in mid-May affected fast food restaurants in 150 cities across the U.S. and was accompanied by solidarity rallies in 33 other countries. Friday was an opportunity for thousands of fast food workers from around the nation to meet one another and celebrate their successes thus far.

Henry’s speech fit very much into that theme; near the end, she even encouraged the audience to stand up and give themselves a bow.
“Because of your courage, this movement is getting stronger every day,” she told the audience. “It’s getting larger.”

The fast food movement has two key demands: An industry-wide minimum wage of $15 per hour, and the right to form a union. Discussing the first of those two demands, Henry argued that striking fast food workers have already had some success in raising the wage floor for the economy as a whole. By her estimate, 6.7 million workers have already had their wages go up as a direct consequence of fast food worker agitation. That includes low-wage workers in Seattle, where local officials recently struck a deal to raise the minimum wage to $15 per hour.
“One-hundred thousand workers sent me here to thank you,” said Henry, referring to the $15 deal.

A spokesperson for Berlin Rosen, the public relations firm that often works with organizations in the fast food workers movement, told msnbc over email that the 6.7 million figure was based on Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) estimates of how many people are affected by recent minimum wage increases. Seattle is just one of several states and municipalities that have recently hiked the minimum wage. Chicago and San Francisco are both contemplating their own increases to $15 per hour.
Henry’s speech framed the assembled workers as the front line of a much larger movement, which encompasses home health care workers, port truckers, adjunct professors, Walmart employees, and workers in various other industries which have seen recent labor unrest.
If the fast food movement is indeed bolstering wages across the country and giving juice to other attempts at worker organizing, it helps explain why SEIU has pumped millions of dollars into supporting workers who aren’t likely to be paying union dues any time soon.

Over the past few years, large unions like SEIU have made significant investments in so-called “alt-labor” groups of non-union workers, although it has not always been clear whether such an investment would return dividends. But minimum wage hikes tend to be unqualified coups for the labor movement, since they raise the median wage for union and non-union workers alike. Similarly, radicalized non-union workers can help provide mass and mobilization on behalf of other causes unions support.

That leaves open the question of what could happen if the fast food workers’ interests diverged from SEIU’s. At least for now, both the union and the non-union workers seem to be reaping benefits from the alliance. As Henry herself put it near the end of her speech, “We will win together.”

Well Done Canada's ISMP

A scientific study released Wednesday suggests the makers of the blood thinner Pradaxa may have held back information that may have prevented serious bleeding complications among some of the million or so Americans using it. (From an  article By Suneel Kamath, MD)

Meanwhile, the maker of Pradaxa, German pharmaceutical giant Boehringer Ingelheim, vehemently denied that it held back important safety data.

Boehringer Ingelheim introduced Pradaxa in 2010 as a replacement for the older drug Coumadin, which had been in use for decades. A major selling point was that Pradaxa offered the benefits of stroke prevention without the hassle of frequent blood monitoring needed with Coumadin.

As with any blood thinner, the concern with Pradaxa was the increased risk of bleeding in patients taking it. Major bleeding with Pradaxa at its currently recommended dose occurs in 3.11 percent of patients taking it each year, according to the major trial that led to FDA approval of the drug. The total incidence of bleeding events with use of the drug, including minor and major bleeding, is 16.42 percent per year.

Research on Pradaxa suggests that it carries a lower risk of bleeding into the brain than Coumadin does, along with a lower risk of life-threatening bleeds and minor bleeding. A large Medicare study published in May confirmed prior knowledge that Pradaxa carries a higher risk of major stomach and intestinal bleeding events.

Researchers at the University of Ottawa’s Institute for Safe Medication Practices (ISMP) wanted to find out whether monitoring the levels of Pradaxa in the blood of patients using it would help doctors avoid bleeding complications. To do this, they looked at Boehringer Ingelheim’s own data exploring the impact of blood level monitoring in conjunction with Pradaxa use.

These researchers said the data show that up to 40 percent of all deaths and serious bleeding events related to Pradaxa could have been avoided by simple blood testing. Checking blood levels periodically, they said, might have allowed doctors to lower the dose of Pradaxa or temporarily stop it in patients with dangerously high levels. This in turn might have prevented some bleeding complications. The paper was published Wednesday in BMJ.

Additionally, the researchers say that Boehringer Ingelheim had this information before Pradaxa was approved in 2010, but that they left it out of the safety information presented to the FDA during the drug’s approval process. Specifically, they said they found internal reports showing that the company’s scientists raised safety concerns about serious bleeding, but that these concerns may have gone unheeded by their superiors

In a statement released Wednesday, Boehringer Ingelheim said that the simulations that served as the basis for these concerns were preliminary and not reliable, and that it would have been inappropriate to report the simulations. They said they did provide the raw data to the FDA.

When asked by ABC News, the FDA declined to comment on the BMJ report. It also did not say how often pharmaceutical companies choose not to report the results of simulations like these to regulators.

This May, Boehringer Ingelheim reached a settlement worth $650 million with about 4,000 people related to alleged bleeding problems with Pradaxa. In a statement released in connection with the settlement, Boehringer Ingelheim’s counsel said the company stands behind that drug and believes the claims lacked merit, but decided to settle to avoid protracted litigation.

The study authors, Drs. Thomas Moore, Donald Mattison and Michael Cohen, have extensive backgrounds in drug safety, representing the senior leadership of ISMP. Moore and Mattison have testified against pharmaceutical companies in prior litigations and Mattison also works for a risk management firm.

Moore, the lead scientist behind the ISMP study, said the problem is that blood levels of Pradaxa can vary significantly from patient to patient. Even if both take the same dose, one person’s blood level could be more than 400 times higher than another’s.

Moore said he turned his attention to Pradaxa in early 2011, the first few months after it was approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration.

In those three months, there were 505 cases of significant bleeding linked to Pradaxa, according to ISMP data, compared to 176 cases of bleeding related to Coumadin during the same period. “The biggest surprise to me was that the FDA, which is overall an excellent safety regulator, chose to almost entirely ignore opportunities to reduce the bleeding risk of this treatment.

According to the report, the information allegedly withheld by Boehringer Ingelheim at the time may have affected the drug’s chances of approval. As evidence, the report offers a 2011 draft of the company’s study on the drug. In it, the investigators note, “Monitoring of plasma concentrations or antithrombotic activity… would be required to identify these patients,” referring to those who would potentially have dangerously high blood levels of the drug even under normal dosing situations.

According to the new report, this information was omitted from the formal presentation to the FDA. The authors of the new report say emails sent between Boehringer Ingelheim employees show that the company knew that advertising the need for blood monitoring with Pradaxa would drastically reduce the number of people who used the drug instead of Coumadin.

In a statement released in response, Boehringer Ingelheim called the BMJ article biased and misleading. The company said the drug is safe , and that the report could lead to patients going off of their medications and potentially putting their lives at risk. The company further noted that the “FDA reaffirmed Pradaxa’s positive benefit-risk profile” following a study of 134,000 Medicare patients with atrial fibrillation.

“Boehringer Ingelheim made a robust effort to find ways to utilize plasma levels to further improve the risk/benefit profile of Pradaxa and it is irrational to suggest otherwise,” said Dr. Sabine Luik, Boehringer Ingelheim’s senior vice president of Medicine Regulatory Affairs, in the release. “The truth is the totality of scientific evidence does not support dosing decisions for Pradaxa based on blood levels.”

The FDA stands by its communication from May of this year stating that Pradaxa has a favorable benefit-to-risk profile and there are no plans to change the labeling of the drug to require or recommend blood monitoring.

Dr. Sonal Singh, a Johns Hopkins cardiologist who was not involved with the BMJ report, said that though it raises important questions, it is too early for a final verdict on Pradaxa or the actions of Boehringer Ingelheim.

“We still don’t understand who bleeds,” he said. “Is it older people, are they younger people…the specificity questions have not been answered.”

Doctor’s Take:

Regardless of what this new report tells us, Pradaxa is a useful – and often life-saving – drug for those who take it. Importantly, this report should not cause people to stop taking their needed medications. What the report does offer is an opportunity for patients to discuss their treatment and their concerns with their doctors. As with most conditions, there are options for treatment. Only through a one-on-one discussion with a medical professional can you determine the best treatment choice for you.

Ongoing -

English 'lage companies tax' helps small business survive

Derby and 19 other local authorities back the so-called "Tesco tax"
Tesco is a very large company in the UK and a roup of local councils in England are formally asking the government for new powers to tax large supermarkets.

BBC News has learned that Derby City Council has called for the right to bring in a levy as a "modest" effort to ensure supermarket spending "re-circulates" in local communities. Some 19 other local authorities back a so-called "Tesco tax" on big retailers, which could raise up to £400m a year.

The government said additional taxes on supermarkets would push up food prices. A similar tax already operates in Northern Ireland and Scotland.

The council has made the suggestion under the Sustainable Communities Act, which allows communities and councils to put forward ideas to government to solve local problems. In its submission, the council says that while supermarkets bring some benefits, they have an overall detrimental impact on the sustainability of local communities.

"Research has shown that 95% of all the money spent in any large supermarket leaves the local economy for good, compared to just 50% from local independent retailers; this levy is a modest attempt to ensure more of that money re-circulates within and continues to contribute to local jobs and local trade," its report states.
'Already benefiting'

The council wants the right to impose a levy on large supermarkets, retain the money raised, and use it to help small businesses. It said it could also use the money to support community centres and parks.

The extra business rates levy, of up to 8.5%, would affect any large retail outlet with a rateable value of more than £500,000.
Four main supermarkets The tax could affect the four main supermarkets

Ranjit Banwait, leader of the council, said communities in Scotland and Northern Ireland were "already benefiting" from the scheme.

"The revenue that we'll be able to generate will mean that we can support local businesses - especially small businesses," he said.

"We'll be able to improve public services."

The government will have six months to respond. If agreed, the levy would apply not just to the 20 councils seeking change but to all local authorities in England.

And if every one of them took it up, it could cost the big supermarkets alone an extra £190m in tax.

If the levy was imposed on all big out-of-town retailers, including businesses such as Ikea, Homebase and B&Q, it could raise about £400m in total.

But the government has already given an indication of how the idea will be received.

The move would hit low-income families the hardest, said the Department for Communities and Local Government (DCLG).
'Powerful legacy'

"We ruled out such a bid for higher taxes under the last round of the Sustainable Communities Act proposals," it said.

"There are much better ways to support small shops."
Richmond High Street Derby City Council says high streets are suffering

However, the move has been given a cautious welcome by the former retail boss and High Street campaigner Bill Grimsey. He proposed the idea of a levy in his independent review of the High Street last year.

He called for a one-off levy on retailers and pub groups with a turnover of more than £10m to help finance plans to allow struggling town centres to rebuild themselves for the future.

Mr Grimsey said it was right that the biggest retailers put something back into their high streets:

"Used wisely, it could leave a lasting and powerful legacy. But I don't want this introduced as an annual levy that essentially becomes another tax," he said.

"If it's used simply to plug council budget shortfalls, it won't be fair and it'll be anti-business. This has to be about the High Street, not clobbering big business."

Town centre expert Mark Williams said the current rates system would be better than a supermarket levy at improving town centres.

"Ironically supermarkets are not looking to go out of town. Customers don't like them - those big starships that landed in those green areas - they are now being cancelled and we are now seeing announcements by Tesco to convert sites that they've got into residential [developments]."
Heated debate

Supporters of the move, which include Oxford, Brighton and Hove, Preston, Southwark and Sefton councils, believe the supermarkets can afford it, saying it is just a fraction of the costs that supermarkets had to swallow when VAT was raised in 2011.

But retailers are likely to strongly resist the move arguing that they are taxed enough already. They pay more in business rates, a property-based tax, than any other form of taxation and have been urging the government for a complete rethink on the system.
Woman shopping in a supermarket

They will also raise concerns about fresh investment and jobs being put at risk.

The British Retail Consortium has said it is consulting its members on the proposed tax.

The levy imposed by the Scottish government on larger shops selling alcohol and tobacco is set to end next year. The aim of the scheme was to make them contribute to public health measures.

It is clear Derby City Council's idea for an additional tax on retailers south of the border will spark even more heated debate.

Canada -no long-term tests on Monsanto GM foods

GM Food Safety Study Reignites Call to Overhaul Canada’s RegulationsNew article

June 24, 2014. Ottawa. The Canadian Biotechnology Action Network (CBAN) is calling on Health Canada to place a moratorium on approving new genetically modified (GM) foods, to re-evaluate the safety of GM foods already on the market, and to initiate a complete overhaul of the regulatory system.

Author's View Point
The awakening people are also beginning to see they have been misled by corporate tricksters and federal government criminals poisoned by too much power, control and greed, which has resulted in the creation of the monstrous, out-of-control corporate beast.

The call comes in response to the republication of a long-term study of a GM corn that exposes a lack of scientific rigour in Canada’s regulatory system seemingly regulated by MONSANTO the GMO giant

Please read and digest: the following reference and detail pages
http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-complete-history-of-monsanto-the-worlds-most-evil-corporation/5387964

“Many Canadians may be surprised to find out that Health Canada doesn’t require any long-term safety tests on GM foods and that this study is the first of its kind,” said CBAN’s Lucy Sharratt.

“The results of this study are a real concern, especially in Canada where we’ve been eating this GM corn since 2001.”

The long-term safety test on GM corn was conducted by a team of scientists in France, led by Caen University molecular biologist Giles-Éric Séralini. It was first published in September 2012 in the peer-reviewed journal Food and Chemical Toxicology, which then retracted the paper in November 2013. The paper is published today in Environmental Sciences Europe. The research team has now also released their raw data.

“We clearly need more independent and critical review of safety claims made by industry. There is too little independent science examining questions of GM food safety,” said Sharratt.

From article:
"As further revelations have broken open regarding this evil giant’s true intentions, Monsanto crafted the ridiculous HR 933 Continuing Resolution, aka Monsanto Protection Act, which Obama robo-signed into law as well.This law states that no matter how harmful Monsanto’s GMO crops are and no matter how much devastation they wreak upon the country, U.S. federal courts cannot stop them from continuing to plant them anywhere they choose. Yes, Obama signed a provision that makes Monsanto above any laws and makes them more powerful than the government itself. We have to wonder who’s really in charge of the country because it’s certainly not him!"

There comes a tipping point though when a corporation becomes too evil and the world pushes back…hard! Many countries continue to convict Monsanto of crimes against humanity and have banned them altogether, telling them to “get out and stay out!”

The GM corn, called NK603, is “Roundup Ready” which means it is genetically modified to be tolerant to Monsanto’s herbicide formulation called Roundup, the most widely used herbicide in the world.

Monsanto published a 90-day feeding trial of the GM corn in 2004, three years after Health Canada’s 2001 approval. The French team conducted their feeding trial over the full two-year lifespan of rats. The rats were fed three different diets: the GM corn alone, the GM corn grown with Roundup (with Roundup residues), and Roundup alone.

The study reported adverse effects including organ damage, tumor growth, and increased mortality in rats fed both GM corn with and without Roundup, and in rats fed low levels of Roundup.

“Canadians need to know about this study before they buy their sweet corn this summer,” said Thibault Rehn of the Quebec coalition Vigilance OGM, “Without long-term studies like this one, we don’t know enough about the safety of GM corn. Its important to remember that there is no labeling for consumers of GM foods.”

CBAN tests of sweet corn samples in October of last year found GM sweet corn in grocery stores, road-side stands and farmers markets across Canada.

How can Canadians make informed choices for their children?

Negativity in People- influences

A study, published in Psychological Science, finds that a previously known gene variant can cause individuals to perceive emotional events–especially negative ones — more vividly than others.

The ability to regulate emotions is essential to both mental and physical well-being. Conversely, difficulties with emotion regulation have been postulated as a core mechanism underlying mood and anxiety disorders.

The ability to identify and distinguish between negative emotions helps us address the problem that led to those emotions in the first place. But while some people can tell the difference between feeling angry and guilty, others may not be able to separate the two. Distinguishing between anger and frustration is even harder. Emotions can also become problematic — for example, for people with depression who can’t stop thinking about negative thoughts.

“This is the first study to find that this genetic variation can significantly affect how people see and experience the world,” says Prof. Rebecca Todd of UBC’s Dept. of Psychology. “The findings suggest people experience emotional aspects of the world partly through gene-coloured glasses — and that biological variations at the genetic level can play a significant role in individual differences in perception.”

The gene in question is the ADRA2b deletion variant, which influences the hormone and neurotransmitter norepinephrine. Previously found to play a role in the formation of emotional memories, the new study shows that the ADRA2b deletion variant also plays a role in real-time perception.

The study’s 200 participants were shown positive, negative and neutral words in a rapid succession. Participants with the ADRA2b gene variant were more likely to perceive negative words than others, while both groups perceived positive words better than neutral words to an equal degree.

“These individuals may be more likely to pick out angry faces in a crowd of people,” says Todd. “Outdoors, they might notice potential hazards — places you could slip, loose rocks that might fall — instead of seeing the natural beauty.”

The findings shed new light on ways in which genetics — combined with other factors such as education, culture, and moods — can affect individual differences in emotional perception and human subjectivity, the researchers say.

Further research is planned to explore this phenomenon across ethnic groups. While more than half of Caucasians are believed to have the ADRA2b gene variant, statistics suggest it is significantly less prevalent in other ethnicities. For example, a recent study found that only 10 per cent of Rwandans had the ADRA2b gene variant.
Contagious? 
The increased risk of depression that comes with negative thinking also seems to rub off.
In the study in Clinical Psychological Science, researchers looked at 103 pairs of college-freshmen roommates’ “cognitive vulnerability,” which is the tendency to think that negative events are a reflection of a person’s own deficiency or that they will lead to more negative events. Those with high cognitive vulnerability are at an increased risk of depression, studies have found.

“We found that participants’ level of cognitive vulnerability was significantly influenced by their roommates’ level of cognitive vulnerability, and vice versa,” the researchers wrote. All roommates in the study were selected randomly; students did not choose their roommates. Only three months of living together was needed for this contagiousness to be seen.

The researchers also found that those who experienced an increase in cognitive vulnerability during the first three months of college had nearly twice the level of depressive symptoms at six months, compared with those who did not experience an increase in cognitive vulnerability, according to the study. The effect was particularly strong when participants were under high-stress conditions.

Prior to this study, it was thought that cognitive vulnerability didn’t change much once a person passed early adolescence. However, the new findings suggest that during big transitions in life — when a person is continually exposed to a new social situation — cognitive vulnerability can be altered, the researchers said.
They noted that genetic, biological and environmental factors all likely play a role in a person’s level of cognitive vulnerability.


Further research is needed to determine whether cognitive vulnerability may change over time, the researchers said, noting that college freshmen are in a unique social environment.
“Our findings are consistent with a growing number of studies that have found that many psychological and biological factors previously thought to be set in stone by adulthood continue to be malleable,” the researchers said.
















Oh Canada -The System is a sham

The System is the Sham
and no one should be surprised that Canadian governments, politicians, government employees, corporations and big business executives act dishonestly, unethically, secretively, non-representatively or wastefully --- the system allows them to do so through weak rules, weak enforcement, and weak penalties.

This is not at all to say that all, most or even many politicians, government employees or corporate executives are dishonest, unethical, secretive, non-representative or wasteful -- but if any of these people act in these ways they will often not be caught, let alone penalized, because of loopholes in laws and rules and weak enforcement systems.


No matter what issue concerns you, strong good government laws will help ensure that the government addresses your concerns.  History has shown that we won't likely have a good country until we have good governments, we won't have a clean environment until we have clean governments, and we won't have a fair and just society until we have fair and just governments.

Incredibly, the laws and enforcement of parking a car illegally are stronger than most government accountability and corporate responsibility laws and enforcement systems in Canada, and in some cases the penalties for parking illegally are higher than for government officials or corporate executives who act dishonestly, unethically, unrepresentable, secretively or wastefully!

For the past more than 140 years, since Canada became a nation (and section 91 of the Constitution of Canada empowered politicians to "make Laws for the Peace, Order, and good Government of Canada"), politicians and government officials have not been passing strong good government laws, but instead have been playing a game by sometimes strengthening laws, but then weakening enforcement, or strengthening enforcement at the same time as creating loopholes in laws, and in almost every case penalties have remained too weak to discourage violations.

While governments and corporations do bad things for many reasons, often it is because they are operating in bad ways.  Especially when governments operate in bad ways, they usually do not require corporations to act in good ways (because they make secret deals behind closed doors with corporate lobbyists).

And unfortunately, the public always pays one way or another when governments or corporations act in bad ways.


See set out on this page Action Alerts about Democracy Watch's campaigns to increase government accountability and corporate responsibility in Canada -- to ensure governments, politicians and their staff and appointees, and government employees, and corporations and corporate executives, all pay a price for acting irresponsibly.

Politicians, government officials, and big business executives are resisting changes to the system that would increase their accountability for wrongdoing.  Canadian politicians have control over their own rules, and Canada's biggest corporations spend $25 billion annually on their lobbying and promotion efforts, so Canadians have to push hard if there is any hope to counter the corporate lobby and win key corporate responsibility changes.  They just don't get it, so we have to give it to them until they do!


We know the ongoing lack of response by governments and big businesses to Canadians' concerns is discouraging, but if we give up pushing then bad politicians and governments and irresponsible big businesses will do even more to hurt people, communities, the environment and the Canadian economy.


You can help clean up the system to prevent future scandals by simply writing letters to politicians making it clear that you are part of the large majority of Canadians who are concerned and want changes to clean up and democratize Canadian governments.  Never assume that no one else is writing a letter, because if everyone assumes that then no one will write a letter.  Politicians actually get very scared when only a small percentage of voters write them, because they are very concerned about losing the next election.

But they still get their pensions even if convicted of crimes?

MSG-Reminders of areas it is used not alway called MSG

Low fat and no fat milk products often contain milk solids that contain MSG and many dairy products contain carrageenan, guar gum, and/or locust bean gum.  Low fat and no fat ice cream and cheese may not be as obvious as yogurt, milk, cream, cream cheese, cottage cheese, etc., but they are not exceptions.

Protein powders contain glutamic acid, which, invariably, will be processed free glutamic acid (MSG).  Individual amino acids are not always listed on labels of protein powders. If you see the wordprotein” in an ingredient label, the product contains MSG.

At present there is an FDA requirement to include the protein source when listing hydrolyzed protein products on labels of processed foods.  Examples are hydrolyzed soy protein, hydrolyzed wheat protein, hydrolyzed pea protein, hydrolyzed whey protein, hydrolyzed, corn protein. If a tomato, for example, were whole, it would be identified as a tomato. Calling an ingredient tomato protein indicates that the tomato has been hydrolyzed, at least in part, and that processed free glutamic acid (MSG) is present.

Disodium guanylate and disodium inosinate are relatively expensive food additives that work synergistically with inexpensive MSG. Their use suggests that the product has MSG in it. They would probably not be used as food additives if there were no MSG present.

MSG reactions have been reported from soaps, shampoos, hair conditioners, and cosmetics, where MSG is hidden in ingredients with names that include the words "hydrolyzed," "amino acids," and/or "protein."  Most sun block creams and insect repellents also contain MSG.

Drinks, candy, and chewing gum are potential sources of hidden MSG and/or aspartame, neotame. and AminoSweet (the new name for aspartame). Aspartic acid, found in neotame, aspartame (NutraSweet), and AminoSweet, ordinarily causes MSG type reactions in MSG sensitive people. (It would appear that calling aspartame "AminoSweet" is industry's method of choice for hiding aspartame.) We have not seen Neotame used widely in the United States. 

Aspartame will be found in some medications, including children's medications. For questions about the ingredients in pharmaceuticals, check with your pharmacist and/or read the product inserts for the names of “other” or “inert” ingredients.

Binders and fillers for medications, nutrients, and supplements, both prescription and non-prescription, enteral feeding materials, and some fluids administered intravenously in hospitals, may contain MSG.

According to the manufacturer, Varivax–Merck chicken pox vaccine (Varicella Virus Live), contains L-monosodium glutamate and hydrolyzed gelatin, both of which contain processed free glutamic acid (MSG) which causes brain lesions in young laboratory animals, and causes endocrine disturbances like OBESITY and REPRODUCTIVE disorders later in life.  It would appear that most, if not all, live virus vaccines contain some ingredient(s) that contains MSG.

Reactions to MSG are dose related, i.e., some people react to even very small amounts. MSG-induced reactions may occur immediately after ingestion or after as much as 48 hours.  The time lapse between ingestion and reaction is typically the same each time for a particular individual who ingests an amount of MSG that exceeds his or her individual tolerance level.

Remember: By food industry definition, all MSG is "naturally occurring." "Natural" doesn't mean "safe."  "Natural" only means that the ingredient started out in nature, like arsenic and hydrochloric acid.

Senators Expenses Auditor General checks for 'accuracy'

Each senator gets around $138,00.00 per year - Totaling around $1.4 million  in wages. Then we have expenses and  allowances  totaling $2.4 million (were recorded by our 9 senators.)

Currently senators expenses are being examined by the Auditor General for 'accuracy'

I ask what do they do for this money.?   Show me senators..show me..
If they have cheated and as honorable men we know they do not (tongue in cheek here) what should be done to them should they removed and pensions also removed etc.





First Nations BC duped by a government verbal promise

The Supreme Court’s affirmation of aboriginal ownership of traditional hunting grounds in British Columbia lends “enormous clout” to another aboriginal land dispute in Ontario.

Klippenstein represents the Mushkegowuk Council, the regional Cree government which is challenging the government’s interpretation of Treaty No. 9, signed in 1905 and 1906 by various First Nations leaders in northern Ontario. 

The James Bay Treaty, as it’s called, covers two-thirds of northern Ontario, the largest tract of land ever negotiated between the government and aboriginal people in Ontario. Ever since, aboriginal people have argued that what was promised to aboriginal leaders and was not included in the treaty documents.

The legal challenge was triggered by the discovery of a 100-year old diary written by one of the original government negotiators. Historians discovered the diary in 2011 in the archives of Queen’s University in Kingston. 

Klippenstein remembers sitting in his office, struggling to make out the handwritten notes and suddenly realizing that what he was reading appear to show that government negotiators deliberately misled the aboriginal leaders who eventually signed the James Bay Treaty.

The diary belonged to Daniel MacMartin, a government commissioner who traveled by canoe across Ontario’s north verbally presenting the treaty to aboriginal leaders who were unable to read the treaty, prepared in Ottawa and written in English. 

Klippenstein says he read the diary "from beginning to end with increasing amazement," as it documented what he claims was "a gigantic fast one" perpetrated against the elders who became signatories to the treaty.

The recovered first Page of Daniel MacMartin's 1905 Treaty 9 Diary. (Treaty 9 Diary)
The most telling detail says Klippenstein in the eye witness account comes on the page where MacMartin writes that, "The chief said, ‘we accept what you have stated.’"

Klippenstein says that’s when he realized the enormous legal significance of what he was reading. According to Klippenstein, the chiefs — unable to read the legal document — were duped by a verbal promise that they would keep their traditional lands for hunting, fishing and trapping. Negotiators deliberately omitted any mention of the so-called take-up clause contained in the treaty document which permitted the government to “take up” the land at any point for its own purposes, from fishing to mining to economic development.
In effect, says Klippenstein, the treaty promises that "we guarantee your hunting rights except when we want to take your land."

Klippenstein says the Supreme Court’s affirmation of aboriginal ownership in B.C. sends a clear message that Canadians will “have to deal with the fact that aboriginal land rights are very real, they exist today and we all have to deal with them.”

Klippenstein marvels at MacMartin’s detailed description of those negotiations.
"It’s mind-boggling," says Klippenstein, "that it happened and mind-boggling that the government negotiator wrote that down knowing the significance of what he was doing."
Is it possible that MacMartin supported his fellow negotiators and was simply making a record of what had been said?

Klippenstein doesn’t think so. "I see it as an amazing story about what was going through his mind," says Klippenstein. "MacMartin decided to write a detailed record of a gigantic fraud. I guess he was torn between his role as a government negotiator and seeing what was being done to aboriginal leaders. Nowhere does the diary mention the take-up clause allowing the government to use the land for resource development."

"He wrote down what he saw and heard, and didn’t know what to do with it."

The diary wasn’t filed with the other treaty documents submitted to the government. Instead says Klippenstein, MacMartin "stashed it away and went to his grave" with what he knew.
In the diary, says Klippenstein, MacMartin doesn’t express criticism of the process. "It’s strictly factual," says Klippenstein.

Last summer, the  Mushkegowuk Cree held a conference in Moose Factory, at which the original signed treaty parchment was displayed along with MacMartin’s handwritten diary. The conference ended with a reenactment of the signing of the Treaty documents, as remembered by Cree elders. Many of the chiefs who signed the document made a simple ‘X’ beside their name. 

The present-day lawsuit doesn’t ask for financial compensation. Instead, it asks the court to make legally binding declarations affirming the Treaty promises to the people of Taykwa Tagamou, one of the First Nations covered by the James Bay Treaty.

The lawsuit asks the court to rule that Treaty 9 doesn’t permit the government to extinguish the rights of the Taykwa Tagamou to hunt and fish over lands in their traditional land through allowing disruptive mining projects, for example, without the First Nation’s consent.

The defendants include the governments of Canada and Ontario and two mining exploration companies that have staked mining claims and have been conducting exploratory work in the Cochrane area without First Nation’s consent.

To Klippenstein, the B.C. ruling by the Supreme Court adds legal heft to that 1905 diary.
"Whether the government misled their leaders or not, the aboriginal claim to the land has to be taken seriously," says Klippenstein.

Did you know this Mr. Harper ?

Auditor General- Senate scandal what can HE do?

Will Nova Scotia Senators agree to AG Audit ? will the public see the audit results?

In its toughest expense probe in the Senate’s history, Auditor General Michael Ferguson, who is reviewing all Senators’ expenses, including travel and office expenses, has asked Senators to provide dates and times when they will be available on the Hill to meet with his auditors over the summer and if they can’t come to Ottawa the AG’s auditors will go to the Senators

“Each one of them [Senators] were asked where they would be and whether they would be available during the summer,” a Senate source said. “If they were available, during what periods of time they would be available, where they would be available and at what times they would be available at their homes and the auditors were prepared to go and visit them at their homes if that was convenient for them. That was to cover the entire period from the time the Senate closed until it is scheduled to open in the second week of September.”

Senators are not offering on-the-record comments in the ongoing and sweeping probe because they’re prohibited by the Auditor General’s Office to discuss the mechanics of the audit. During the course of the review, the AG’s auditors meet with individual Senators and their staff several times. The first meeting is usually held between auditors and Senators to explain the methodology. Auditors also meet with Senators’ full-time, part-time, and contractual staffers to share the same details. During the review, if auditors come up with questions about individual housing and travel expense claims, they meet with Senators and staffers again on an as-needed basis.

Senate sources told The Hill Times that in meetings with the staff, auditors ask them if they know of any Senators who have made ineligible travel and hospitality expense claims. In some cases, auditors did get some tips from staffers, according to sources.

Prior to the start of the audit process, the AG’s Office held information sessions in the fall on the Hill with Senators and their staffers to explain the mechanics of the audit. The AG’s Office is expected to complete its work by December and release the report by March of next year.

In the ongoing review of the Senators’ expenses, sources told The Hill Times that auditors are conducting a detailed examination of phone bills, all hospitality expenses, per diems, and, in some cases, requesting personal credit card records of Senators who used those cards to pay for Senate business-related expenses.

One of the most frequently contentious issues that has emerged between the AG’s auditors and individual Senators is whether or not an expense was related to Parliamentary business or not, sources said.

Using a hypothetical scenario, a source said that if a Senator travels out of Ottawa to attend a conference that’s not directly related to the Senate or standing committee work and claims travel costs and per diems, auditors ask pointed questions as to how this trip was related to his or her Parliamentary work. This, in some cases, has caused testy exchanges.

“They [auditors] can’t tell Senators what is and what is not Parliamentary business. In some cases, Senators are pushing back,” one Senate source said.

Another said: “They’ve [auditors] never worked on Parliament Hill. They have no idea about Senators’ Parliamentary work. How can they decide what is and what’s not Parliamentary business.”

Mr. Ferguson also has told Senators that his auditors reserve the right to interview Senators’ neighbours to ascertain that they actually reside where they claim to and also to verify from third parties or their staffers the validity of their filed claims, a fourth source said.
Since the start of the Senate expenses scandal, Senate administration, which used to approve most of the Senators’ expenses without going into too much detail, is now a lot more vigilant and is also conducting a vigorous examination of all claims, sources said. 

A spokesman for Mr. Ferguson declined to provide any details on how auditors are going to contact Senators during the summer months, saying his office would not comment on the methodology or the scope until the completion of the audit.

“The work is ongoing, and any details regarding our scope, progress and methodology will not be discussed while the work is ongoing,” Ghislain Desjardains, the AG’s media relations manager wrote in an email to The Hill Times.
Mr. Desjardins also declined to say how many Senators have been audited and how many are yet to be audited.

Conservative Whip Elizabeth Marshall (Newfoundland and Labrador) told The Hill Times that the AG’s Office and individual Senators will make arrangements on their own in how they want to meet in the summer months.

Sen. Marshall, a former AG in her province, is the head of a three-member Senate Liaison Committee along with Liberal Sen. George Furey (Newfoundland and Labrador) and Conservative Sen. Larry Smith (Saurel, Que.) to coordinate the audit process. The committee meets every month with auditors to iron out any wrinkles and to ensure that the process works smoothly.

Sen. Furey declined to be interviewed and referred all questions to Sen. Marshall who declined to comment further on the process.

Liberal Sen. Jim Munson, who is also the whip, told The Hill Times that the AG’s Office is dealing directly with Senators to meet over the summer months and is not dealing with his office as whip.

  Individual Senators were tight-lipped about how the AG’s Office is going to reach them in the summer break because they’ve been prohibited by the AG’s Office to talk about how the Senate audit is being conducted, declining to go on-the-record.

Some told The Hill Times that they’ve already provided the AG’s Office with details on when they will be available to meet in Ottawa. But others are unwilling to come to Ottawa during Parliament’s summer break.

“I’m not going to come to Ottawa for this [in the summer recess]. They’re welcome to come to see me, I’m not coming here. Either they come to see me or wait until the fall session,” a Senator said.

Senators have 64 return air trips to and from the regions they represent and Ottawa. This includes 25 trips anywhere in Canada, four of which can be used to travel to Washington D.C. and New York for the UN.

Senators who live more than 100 kilometers from Parliament Hill can charge up to $22,000 a year for secondary housing expenses if they rent or own a property in or near Ottawa, under the Senate rules.

After the Senate expenses scandal made national headlines last year, revealing that some Conservative and Liberal Senators made allegedly ineligible housing and travel expense claims, the Senate’s Internal Economy, Budgets and Administration Committee invited the auditor general to undertake a comprehensive audit of all Senators’ expenses.

Since then, three Conservative-turned-Independent Senators—Pamela Wallin, Patrick Brazeau and Mike Duffy—have been suspended without pay from the Upper Chamber until the end of this Parliamentary session and former Liberal Sen. Mac Harb has resigned.

The RCMP is conducting an investigation into the questionable housing and travel expenses of the four Senators.

In February, the RCMP formally filed criminal charges against Sen. Brazeau and Sen. Harb with one count each of breach of trust and fraud.
 
As of deadline last week, no charges were filed against Sen. Duffy and Sen. Wallin but some media reports have suggested that it could happen in the coming weeks or months.

The RCMP also conducted a lengthy investigation into the questionable transaction between Nigel Wright, the former chief of staff to Prime Minster Stephen Harper (Calgary Southwest, Alta.) and Sen. Duffy, but ended up not filing any charges against Mr. Wright.

The former chief of staff to Prime Minister Harper gave Sen. Duffy $90,000 to pay off his questionable Senate expense claims and resigned shortly after CTV reported the story.
“When the RCMP initiated the investigation there were sufficient grounds to pursue the matter with regards to the offences of breach of trust, bribery, frauds on the government, as well as receiving prohibited compensation contrary to the Parliament of Canada Act,” RCMP Cpl. Lucy Shorey said in a statement issued in mid-April.

“Upon completion of the investigation, we have concluded that the evidence gathered does not support criminal charges against Mr. Wright.”

What evidence and can we the public and tax payers .. see such convincing  evidence?