OTTAWA — The Ukrainian Canadian Congress is urging the Canadian government to revoke a permit that allowed the export of a turbine repaired in Montreal to a Russian energy giant.
The permit granted Siemens Canada an exemption to sanctions against Russia for two years starting in early July and would allow the company to import and repair up to five more turbines as per their maintenance schedule.
The parts would be sent back to Germany for use in Gazprom’s Nord Stream 1 pipeline. The pipeline ordinarily supplies natural gas to Germany and other European countries but is currently shut down, with the Russian state-controlled company blaming problems on a gas leak.
Ukrainian Canadian Congress CEO Ihor Michalchyshyn told the House of Commons Foreign Affairs Committee Wednesday that it’s time for Canada to “show strength” and stand up to Russia during its ongoing assault on Ukraine by upholding its sanctions regime.
He said Canada’s decision is playing into Russia’s strategy to make the West look incoherent.
“The more that they can poke holes in the sanctions regimes, find differences between jurisdictions and build inconsistencies between our governments that are largely on the same page on this issue, we believe that is their overall goal,” he said.
“This has become a major international matter. It is part of the Russian disinformation flow, as has been said. And they continue to find an oil leak a week, basically, to find reasons why they’re not going to provide more energy to Europe.”
The Canadian government has defended its decision to allow the exports, saying the move is intended to support Europe during the energy crisis created by the war.
The committee, which initiated a study of the turbines issue in July, heard from Foreign Affairs Minister Mélanie Joly last month. She said Canada’s sanctions exemption was a way to call Russia’s bluff because it would deny President Vladimir Putin a pretext for reducing the flow of natural gas through the pipeline.
That was one of the concerns cited in a “memorandum for action” prepared for Global Affairs Canada recommending the exemption, which was filed in Federal Court in response to a legal challenge of the decision by the Ukrainian World Congress.
“Russia appears to be leveraging this situation to blame western sanctions for energy insecurity even though it maintains the ability to supply Europe with the natural gas that it requires,” the document said. “Allowing Russia to maintain this narrative risks broader implications for support for Ukraine.”
But witnesses who appeared at the committee Wednesday said that the strategy hasn’t worked, as Russia continues to “weaponize energy,” as multiple witnesses and MPs put it, and blame sanctions for the slowdowns in gas delivery.
“The Kremlin has now explicitly stated that gas will only start flowing through Nord Stream 1 once Canadian and western sanctions have been lifted. This is blackmail,” said Marcus Kolga, a senior fellow at the Macdonald-Laurier Institute.
Benjamin Schmitt, a research associate at Harvard University, said a sanctions exemption would only have been justifiable “in a world where Russia hasn’t been weaponizing energy for years.”
But it has, he said. And Germany’s own technical assessments have stated that Russia’s explanations for reductions in gas flow “were nothing more than pretext for another political energy cut,” said Schmitt. He argued it is baffling that, despite knowing this, Berlin continued to pressure Ottawa to return the repaired turbines.
Germany and the United States have stood behind Canada’s decision as Western nations grapple with how to balance support for Ukraine with Europe’s energy needs ahead of winter.
At an annual economic forum in Vladivostok, Russia, on Wednesday, Putin dismissed the argument that Russia was using energy as a weapon by suspending Nord Stream 1 and said sanctions had made the pipeline turbine unsafe to operate.
Putin threatened to cut off energy supplies completely if the West tries to put a price cap on Russian exports, a move the European Union has signalled it is working toward. He said, “we will just halt supplies if it contradicts our economic interests. We won’t supply any gas, oil, diesel oil or coal.”
It is asking for Canada to designate the Russian Federation as a state sponsor of terrorism, expel the Russian ambassador from Canada and suspend travel permits for Russians wishing to travel here.
Most countries in Europe have expelled Russian diplomats since the conflict began, and the European Union recently moved to make it more difficult for Russian citizens to enter.
Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has previously justified the presence of Russian diplomats in Canada by saying that he wants to avoid a tit-for-tat response that could hinder the work conducted by Canadians assigned to Moscow.
U.S. President Joe Biden said “no” Tuesday, when asked whether Russia should be designated as a state sponsor of terrorism, despite bipartisan support for such a move in the U.S. Senate.
This report by The Canadian Press was first published Sept. 7, 2022.
— With files from The Associated Press.
Marie-Danielle Smith, The Canadian Press
“I support,” is an honest statement.
“I will” is not always an honest statement, but it gets votes.
A few days back, mayoral candidate Gil Penalosa (@Penalosa_G) tweeted, “Stop Tory/Ford from giving away PUBLIC Ontario Place to spa/waterpark tall building. Since 2018 Ford/Tory announced ‘amusement destination’ & he has supported it! The way to keep it as a magnificent PUBLIC park is to #VoteGil4Mayor. Together we’ll stop it in a #Toronto4Everyone.”
Gil’s tweet rubbed me the wrong way. The Ontario provincial government owns Ontario Place; therefore, Gil’s claim, “The way to keep it as a magnificent PUBLIC park is to #VoteGil4Mayor.” is, to be kind, an exaggeration. Toronto’s mayor does not have absolute control over Ontario Place.
Another recent tweet that rubbed me the wrong way was by Arber Pucci, who is running for Ward 10 (Spadina-Fort York) Toronto city council: ANNOUNCEMENT: I am promising to the residents of King West that as my first action as councillor, I will shut down Hyde Social so you can finally get a good night’s sleep.
In Toronto, a councillor does not have the authority to shut down businesses.
All elections have one thing in common: Promises.
As I watch those campaigning in Toronto for the upcoming election, I question whether many of the promises they are making are realistic. Are their promises outright lies or said out of “not knowing”? In the heat of campaigning, candidates will say anything to win votes.
Recently, I spoke with Glenn De Baeremaeker, a former councillor for Scarborough Center (Ward 38, before Doug Ford, reduced the number of Toronto council seats from 47 to 25) about some of the promises those running for council are making.
De Baeremaeker sees the role of a city councillor as one of serving the people rather than running on a political platform, which I am 100% in agreement with.
During our discussion of what Toronto councillors can and cannot do, Glenn and I touched on this election’s three hot-button issues: affordable housing, crime, especially gun violence, and public transportation.
De Baeremaeker pointed out that housing has been a Toronto issue for more than 50 years; it is not a “new crisis.” Every major city with a growing population faces the challenge of housing affordability. In 2019 Toronto welcomed 117,720 immigrants, along with all those who moved to Toronto from across the country.
The factors contributing to the cost of housing, such as interest rates, and immigration (supply and demand), are well beyond the control of councillors, or even the mayor. Affordable housing would have been built years ago if it were as easy as those running for office claim. Mayors and council members want to be re-elected, why wouldn’t they build affordable housing? Any councillor, or mayoral candidate, who claims to be able to single-handedly address Toronto’s housing affordability is, to be polite, misinforming voters.
Since the beginning of civilization, crime has existed in various forms. Glenn pointed out, “Less than 1% of the population resort to violent crime.” Most violent crimes are committed by angry young men. Therefore, the question becomes, what can be done to reach these young men before they begin committing violent crimes?
I do not see any councillor, current or running, having the education, experience, or ability to reach the disenfranchised youth in his/her ward.
There is also this fact: Toronto borders the world’s largest gun-toting population; thus, gun smuggling is inevitable. Border crossings are a federal responsibility, not a councillor’s. Glenn noted, “Toronto, like all of Canada, is the victim of the insanity in the U.S. today.” Toronto is part of the global village we all live in. Torontonians do not live in their own bubble.
Federal and provincial funding is required for Toronto to build any public transportation. De Baeremaeker noted that Toronto is currently building more public transit infrastructure than at any time in its history. The Toronto Transit Commission (TTC) is governed by an 11-member Board consisting of city councillors and members of the public. Even if a wannabe councillor were to sit on the TTC board, their promise of a bus stop or increasing bus service being dangled to attract votes is unlikely to happen anytime soon.
With councillors pushing for more transit in their respective ward, public transit has become a highly sensitive issue. A councillor is only one vote out of 26, so ask yourself if a candidate has the political prowess to deliver on their transit promises.
Glenn and I then directed our conversation to what Toronto city councillors can and should do.
A councillor’s priority should be to assist their constituents.
Like myself, De Baeremaeker believes councillors should practice servitude. Constituents should be able to easily contact their councillor and/or their staff for assistance. It is important for constituents to know they can reach their councillor to expeditiously resolve issues such as graffiti removal, fixing a pothole, emptying an overflowing garbage can, or repairing a knocked-down stop sign.
Additionally, councillors should be informing their constituents about the numerous programs the city of Toronto has, many of which are underutilized.
Dealing with Development:
All of Toronto is pre-zoned. Therefore, a councillor cannot control (READ: stop) development in their ward, whether residential or commercial. However, a councillor does have influence over facilitating studies, public consultation, approvals and working with developers to help shape how a development project will integrate into the community. (e.g., stop lights, parks, sidewalks) Councillors can and should work with developers to create a net benefit for the community. For example, incorporating retail spaces at the bottom of a condominium development like De Baeremaeker negotiated with the developers of the Me Living Condos at the corner of Markham Road and Ellesmere Road.
A councillor can also push for additional infrastructure for the betterment of their ward, such as a community center, libraries, and parks.
Keep Taxes Low:
“Taxes are the price we pay for civilized society.” – Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes.
Councillors cannot freeze or cut taxes. “I’ll vote to keep tax increases as low as possible,” while not designed to attract votes, is an honest statement. Inevitably taxes will increase year-over-year, ideally rising in line with inflation.
Perhaps I am being romantically naive, but I hope those running for mayor or council feel obligated to tell voters what they can and cannot do instead of what they think voters want to hear. However, at the end of the day it is the voters’ responsibility to not vote for candidates who make unrealistic promises.
Nick Kossovan, a self-described connoisseur of human psychology, writes about what’s on his mind from Toronto. You can follow Nick on Twitter and Instagram @NKossovan
Former Conservative senator Don Meredith charged with three counts of sexual assault
OTTAWA — A former senator who resigned from the upper chamber amid a sexual misconduct scandal is now facing criminal charges.
Don Meredith, 58, has been charged with three counts of sexual assault and one count of criminal harassment, Ottawa police said Saturday.
A source confirmed to The Canadian Press that the man in question was the former Conservative senator.
The charges relate to incidents that allegedly took place in 2013 and 2014 and were reported by an adult woman, police said, offering no other details.
Meredith has been released on a promise to appear in court.
A lawyer who represented him in the past did not immediately respond to request for comment on the charges. Alison Korn, a spokeswoman for the Senate’s Standing Committee on Internal Economy, Budgets and Administration, declined to comment on the matter as it is now before the courts.
Meredith — an ordained minister — was appointed to the senate on the advice of former prime minister Stephen Harper in 2010, but resigned in 2017 after a scathing report from the Senate’s ethics officer.
The report from Lyse Ricard, who held the position at the time, concluded Meredith had violated the chamber’s code of ethics by engaging in a relationship with a girl when she was just 16 and recommended the upper house take the unprecedented step of expelling him.
Meredith resigned from the Senate weeks later just as the upper chamber was believed ready to expel him over the relationship. He also acknowledged the sexual relations outlined in the report but said nothing took place until she turned 18.
A second Senate investigation, released in 2019, found Meredith had repeatedly bullied, threatened and intimidated his staff, as well as touched, kissed and propositioned some of them.
Saturday’s announcement marks the first time Meredith has faced criminal charges related to sexual misconduct.
This report by The Canadian Press was first published Oct. 1, 2022.
The Canadian Press
Jaded, cynical, disillusioned: report says federal whistleblowers fear reprisal
OTTAWA — Federal workers are increasingly cynical, skeptical and disillusioned about the idea of reporting wrongdoing in the public service, says a recent survey.
That pessimism is more “palpable and widespread” now than it was before the pandemic, and bureaucrats have become more likely to fear reprisals for whistleblowing.
Research firm Phoenix Strategic Perspectives Inc. delivered the report in March to the Office of the Public Sector Integrity Commissioner, which investigates serious abuses within the federal government.
Commissioner Joe Friday says there is a maze of oversight mechanisms available to public servants and it can be discouraging or exhausting to figure out where to lodge a complaint.
He says he thinks public servants are feeling more isolated and disconnected during the pandemic, making it more difficult to feel confident in coming forward — let alone to gather the sort of documentation that whistleblowers require.
Chris Aylward, the president of the Public Service Alliance of Canada, says the protections in place for whistleblowers are inadequate and the regime must be strengthened.
“It’s discouraging to see that federal workers have grown more cynical about whistleblowing and reporting wrongdoing in the public service, but it is not surprising,” Aylward said in a statement.
“It can be intimidating to come forward as a whistleblower, and our members are right to fear retaliation. Strong measures are needed to protect workers that speak out. Instead, there are too many conditions on whistleblowers that unnecessarily restrict disclosure.”
The report, based on nine focus group sessions held in March, found that workers feared a wide variety of hypothetical repercussions, many of which are premised on the fear that confidentiality could be compromised.
These included a negative impact on the physical or psychological well-being of the whistleblower, a lack of support, the idea that they would acquire a reputation as a troublemaker, diminished trust and division among co-workers and “damage to the image or reputation of the public service.”
Some said they feared their careers would be derailed — that they’d be given poor evaluations, be taken off projects, be assigned less challenging work or have their workloads increased.
Compared to a similar report undertaken in 2015, public servants were more likely to say that their attitudes toward whistleblowing had changed over time. This time around, they described themselves as having become “less naive,” “more pessimistic,” “more cynical,” “more jaded,” “less bright-eyed” and “more disillusioned.”
Workers tended to see whistleblowing as a good thing and described whistleblowers as brave people who should be encouraged and supported. But they emphasized that prospective whistleblowers “need to understand what they are facing”: a process that is “long, arduous, stressful and uncertain as to the outcome.”
And while participants reported an increase in awareness and education about the process of reporting wrongdoing, they didn’t trust it.
“Many held the view that such changes amount to ‘virtue signalling’ or ‘window dressing’ as opposed to constituting real cultural change,” the report says.
A little over half of the focus group attendees were unaware of the existence of the office that commissioned the research in the first place.
That’s not necessarily such a bad thing, Friday says.
“I think if every public servant woke up every morning and first thing on their mind was, ‘How do I bring wrongdoing to light,’ that might suggest that there’s more wrongdoing than anybody thinks there is,” he says.
Still, it’s apparent that many don’t know how the whistleblowing process works, or don’t have trust in it if they do. “Clearly, there’s more to do,” he says.
It can be frustrating to push for cultural change on the margins of a 300,000-person organization, Friday says — and with no influence or authority over the internal, department-specific procedures that govern most of the whistleblowing system.
Still, his office of 35 people has reached thousands of public servants with events and presentations over the course of the pandemic, he says, in an attempt to demystify the process.
In the seven years he’s been commissioner — and during his time as deputy commissioner and legal counsel before that — Friday says he’s never given a presentation that didn’t result in a followup with someone in the audience who was considering reporting wrongdoing.
“We’re talking about something very personal, very often something that someone has not yet spoken to anybody about,” he says, lamenting that the pandemic has resulted in fewer opportunities to have face-to-face conversations.
“We’re trying our damnedest to continue with our outreach efforts.”
This report by The Canadian Press was first published Oct. 1, 2022.
Marie-Danielle Smith, The Canadian Press
"A Perfect Storm": Why BC Industrial Real Estate Is Migrating To Alberta – Storeys
Former Conservative senator Don Meredith charged with three counts of sexual assault
Silver investment demand jumped 12% in 2019
Europe kicks off vaccination programs | All media content | DW | 27.12.2020 – Deutsche Welle
Global Media Markets, 2015-2020, 2020-2025F, 2030F – TV and Radio Broadcasting, Film and Music, Information Services, Web Content, Search Portals And Social Media, Print Media, & Cable – GlobeNewswire
Science20 hours ago
See NASA's DART Asteroid Crash Through the Lens of Webb, Hubble Telescopes – CNET
Media23 hours ago
Brock Media Clips for Friday, Sept. 30 – The Brock News – Brock University
Health22 hours ago
Human Brain Project researchers identify new marker of ALS outcome – Medical Xpress
Business21 hours ago
Lululemon settles lawsuit with Peloton over allegations of ‘copycat’ clothing
Tech20 hours ago
Apple iPhone 14 Pro achieves top DxOMark scores for selfie camera and video performance
Business20 hours ago
Ontario Securities Commission files allegations of fraud in multimillion-dollar crypto offering – CP24
Media22 hours ago
LETTER: Hughes has shown 'disregard' for residents, media – OrilliaMatters
News22 hours ago
Liberals to launch Indo-Pacific strategy this year, shaped by looming China assembly