Why I can't support the Citizens' Assembly on Electoral Reform report

This October 15th, Ontarians will be asked in a referendum whether they wish to adopt a "Mixed Member Proportional System (MMP) as a means of electing our provincial legislature and government. Put simply, if adopted Ontarians would be asked to cast two ballots in every subsequent provincial election, which are now held at fixed dates; one vote for their local member and a second one for their political party of choice ("list" candidates). The Ontario Legislature would be made up of 90 local members and 39 list members, whose purpose would be to ensure that a party's popular vote in the election actually reflects their proportion of seats in the provincial parliament. Therefore if a party garners 25% of the popular vote, but only elects 15 members, that party would be allotted 17 of the list members to ensure their entitled 32 seat (25% of 129) composition in the Legislature.

However, there are two important caveats to this proposed restructuring of our electoral system. The first is that a party must garner at least 3% of the popular vote province-wide in order to be eligible for any list seats. The second is that, even if a party's local member composition exceeds their seat entitlement based on percentage of popular vote, they do not lose any seats. For example, if a party earns 45% of the popular vote and wins 70 of the 90 local seats, their overall entitlement including list seats would be 58 out of the 129 in total, based on percentage of popular vote. This party would not have 12 seats taken away; they would keep their 70 seats even though their percentage of seats in the legislature exceeds their percentage of popular vote. These two limitations contribute to many's belief that the proposed changes to our electoral system would be ineffective and perhaps cause more confusion than they are worth.

At the bottom are election data from the last four Ontario elections, taken from the Citizen's Assembly report itself, and which are applied to the proposed MMP scenario. The first three columns are the political parties who won seats, the percentage of vote and the percentage of seats actually won, based on the first past the post system of electing one member per riding. The fourth column represents how the seats would have broken down in a legislature with 90 local seats, as proposed under MMP. The fifth column indicates the number of list seats that would be allocated under MMP, while the sixth indicates the total number of seats in the proposed MMP. The final column suggests the number of seats to which each party would be entitled if the above two restrictions were not in place.

The first thing one notes is that it would be virtually impossible for a party to obtain majority standing in the Ontario Legislature, wherein a party would require a majority of the popular vote province wide. Indeed, the report itself points out that the last time this occurred in Ontario was 1937. The report suggests a bias against majority governments in that they are undemocratic. Unless the actual allocation of seats matches the percentage of popular vote, we somehow have a breach of democratic principles.

However, the application of MMP principles to actual election data shows that there are flaws with the proposed model. In the first place, the elections of 1990 and 2003 are telling, in that both the NDP and Liberals, respectively, benefitted from a gross over-representation of seats based on popular vote, to a point where, under an MMP model, they won more seats than their percentage of popular vote entitled them to (the Conservatives came close in 1995). In the earlier election, Bob Rae's government would have won 51 local seats when, as a function of proportion, they only ought to have had 49. In the latter, Dalton McGuinty's Liberals won 63 with an entitlement of only 59. MMP, in spite of its seemingly dogmatic adherence to the principles of proportionality, can still result in parties "stealing" seats to which they are not proportionally entitled.

What is also telling is the fact that in each of the elections, some of the list seats would not even be allocated! This is a result of the restriction on list seats to those parties who gain more than 3% of the popular vote. The number of unallocated seats ranges from 2 in the last two elections, where independents and other parties garnered 4 and 2 percent of the popular vote, to as many as 6 in 1995, where they earned 6 percent of the vote. In some cases, the winning parties are skimming seats to the detriment of the smaller parties, while in others seats are just being wasted. Overrepresentation of seats certainly occurs with the status quo. However, why would we want to embark upon a course of potential complication and confusion if we are not going to eliminate the unfairness of the allocation of "list" seats? Ultimately, what is the point?

There are those for whom an election at least every five years just isn't democratic enough. Unless every government is a minority one, critics assume that there is something insidious at work. All parties must have their part in the formulation of public policy and if one party has a majority, that is just not possible. It is for these people that MMP is designed to assuage. However, the scenarios foreseen by the don't lend themselves to much of anything different from the status quo.

On page 11 of their report, the Citizens' Assembly asserts that "coalition majority governments" (ostensibly a mixture of two of the main parties, neither of whom has an outright majority on their own) are common under MMP and are both stable and effective. What they don't point out is that such coalitions are possible and common in the current system. Not only that, the ones we have seen recently at the federal level, where Harper's Conservatives have danced alternatively with both the Bloc and the N.D.P., may even be more to the liking of MMP supporters, as they frequently change within the lifetime of a parliament. This is the opposite of what MMP supporters hate most; an unchanging, unflinching monolith of a majority government that can't be moved for at least four years.

What is more strange, and potentially disturbing, is the report's claim that MMP "may actually enhance stability by discouraging abrupt shifts in policy that can occur in the current system when the government changes from one party to another...". Huh? I thought one of the benefits of democracy was that if the public grew tired of a party in power too long, that they could throw the bums out?! It isn't the place of an electoral system to dictate the pace of policy change, but the voters themselves. Many would argue that after eight years of Conservative rule under Harris and Eves (or even five years under Rae and the N.D.P.), incremental change wasn't the order of the day, but a wholesale change in policy direction. That's democracy.

In terms of list seats, those allocated solely on the basis of "topping up" parties who are underrepresented following the allocation of the local seats, there is a potential for problems. As it is proposed, each party would nominate their list candidates and rank them in order of preference from 1 to 39. If, for example, the Conservatives were entitled to 24 of the list seats (as in the 2003 election scenario), then the top 24 on their list would find their way onto the floor of Queen's Park. The Ontario Citizens' Assembly Report seems naively optimistic that the process of selecting and ranking of these 39 candidates for each party will not be problematic, suggesting on page 8 that "voters will be able to assess whether parties created their lists in a fair and transparent way". Thirty-nine politicians. For each party. Recent history suggests that parties have difficulty with transparency in nominating a single candidate in some ridings, if the recent spate of direct party appointments (ie. those without a formal nomination process) is any indication. The often unsavoury business of the party nomination process has the possibility of multiplying exponentially if the 39 list seats are included in a revised electoral format.

All MMP really does is make us feel better about the results being more statistically fair.....to the three established parties. It does precious little for smaller parties, nor will it have much of an effect on how parties cooperate over and above the status quo. If the intention, coupled with the imposition of fixed election dates, is to move us towards a more Americanized system of gridlock and stalemate (what the architects of MMP really mean by "stability"), then perhaps one would consider voting for a system of MMP. For my part, I will stick with the devil I know.

2003 results	% of vote	% of seats	applied to 90 seat legislature of "local" members	allotment of "list" seats	Total number of seats in MMP legislature	Entitlement of seats in MMP legislature (based on % of party vote)
PC	35	23	21	24	45	45
Liberal	46	70	63	0	63	59
NDP	15	7	6	13	19	19
other parties	4	0	0	0	0	5
TOTALS	100	100	90	37	127	128
1999 results
PC	45	57	51	7	58	58
Liberal	40	34	31	21	52	52
NDP	13	9	8	9	17	17
other parties	2	0	0	0	0	3
TOTALS	100	100	90	37	127	130
1995 results
PC	45	63	57	1	58	58
Liberal	31	23	21	19	40	40
NDP	21	13	12	15	27	27
other parties	3	0	0	0	0	4
TOTALS	100	99	90	35	125	129
1990 results
PC	24	15	14	17	31	31
Liberal	32	28	25	16	41	41
NDP	38	57	51	0	51	49
other parties	6	0	0	0	0	8
TOTALS	100	100	90	33	123	129

Meet Blueberry

If Dinsdale were alive today, he'd be rolling in his greyhound grave! He would be most displeased! Or, maybe not.

After several months of lobbying, I finally gave in and we have adopted "Blueberry", a lovely five year-old rescue Miniature Pinscher. She was rescued from a puppy mill somewhere in Ohio, where she had spent her entire life being bred up the wazoo. Her grossly elongated teets (sp?) are testimony to the number of puppies forced out of her. Apparently, and this may be the case in Canada, they give out kennel licenses in Ohio like they were cereal box toys.

After Blueberry outlived her "usefulness", she was mercifully handed over to a rescue operation, I.M.P.S. (Internet Miniatur Pinscher Society) and found her way to a nice lady in Ottawa, who fostered her. We had been warned that this particular breed was not the best to have around a young child (Liam is approaching his first birthday as I write this!), however we were assured that Blueberry had been exposed to children and seemed alright with them.

We have had Blueberry for about 24 hours, and what a fun full day it has been! Even as I write, he is baying in the background, likely because Cathy has gone out and hasn't returned for a couple of hours. He arrived yesterday with four other dogs who were travelling with the nice lady from Ottawa. Within ten minutes of their arrival, there were four "accidents" on our living room carpet, for which Blueberry was responsible for two! Both number one and number two! Good thing I talked Cathy out of getting a new rug for the living room!

Since then, not a single one! We were concerned, also, about how her first night would be with us. Again, no problems. We (and she) decided that she would sleep between Cathy and I the first night. We put her down between us at about 9:30 p.m. and she didn't make a sound the whole night.

She hasn't eaten too much since arriving, either. We hope that changes once she gets a little more used to her new surroundings. We have Eukanuba in a small dish for her. I swear by this product, as it kept Dinsdale the fit of health for his 11.5 years! Although, it didn't keep the cancer away (sniff!). She has a mildly disconcerting habit of taking bits of the food away from her dish and strewing it across the kitchen floor. We hope she can "unlearn" this habit.

Liam is thrilled. He was the reason I eventually bent and allowed Blueberry into our home. I am still feeling devastated at the loss of Dinsdale and said, initially, that I wanted another year before getting another dog - and another greyhound. However, Liam screeches with delight every time he sees a dog, so we figured now was a good time to get another one. He has tried to gently stroke her on a couple of occasions and Blueberry seems quite tolerant of him. If she isn't interested, she'll simply scurry away (like she does from me on most occasions!). She likes to hide from me under the dining room table. However, when I do manage to get my hands on her, she doesn't offer too much of a protest when I pick her up.

Its been a busy weekend! Between the Tour de France and the British Open on television (Rasmussen still leading, Padraig Harrington over Sergio Garcia in a playoff), and trying desperately to get through he new Harry Potter book before I find out who dies from an outside media source, I have been of somewhat limited help to Cathy in looking after Liam and now Blueberry. But we have the rest of the summer to get her used to her new home.

Just a bit of an editorial for those wanting to get a pet: never mind a puppy or a kitten. There are many, many adult animals that need rescuing just like Blueberry and Dinsdale all those years ago. Only today, there was an article in the Toronto Sun about the fact that the Toronto Humane Society has been overrun with over 1,000 unwanted animals. Contact your local SPCA or Humane Society, or find another rescue organization. They even have breed specific ones, such as the Internet Miniature Pinscher Service or the Greyhound Lovers of Hamilton Wentworth. You won't regret it!

Passage from Kurt Vonnegut's Slaughterhouse Five

Not that I am rabidly anti-war or anything, but I found this passage from Kurt Vonnegut's Slaughterhouse Five very interesting:

{Billy}....turned on the television. He came slightly unstuck in time, saw the late movie backwards, then forwards again. It was a movie about American bombers in the Second World War and the gallant men who flew them. Seen backwards by Billy, the story went like this:

American planes, full of holes and wounded men and corpses took off backwards from an airfield in England. Over France, a few German fighter planes flew at them backwards, sucked bullets and shell fragments from some of the planes and crewmen. They did the same for wrecked American bombers on the ground, and those planes flew up backwards to join the formation.

The formation flew backwards over a German city that was in flames. The bombers opened their bomb bay doors, exerted a miraculous magnetism which shrunk the fires, gathered them into cylindrical steel containers, and lifted the containers into the bellies of the planes. The containers were stored neatly in racks. The Germans below had miraculous devices of their own, which were long steel tubes. They used them to suck more fragments from the crewmen and planes. But there were still a few wounded Americans, though, and some of the bombers were in bad repair. Over France, though, German fighters came up again, made everything and everybody as good as new.

When the bombers got back to their base, the steel cylinders were taken from the racks and shipped back to the United States of America, where factories were operating night and day, dismantling the cylinders, separating the dangerous contents into minerals. Touchingly, it was mainly women who did this work. The minerals were then shipped to specialists in remote areas. It was their business to put them into the ground, to hide them cleverly, so they would never hurt anybody again.

The American fliers turned in their uniforms, became high school kids. And Hitler turned into a baby, Billy Pilgrim supposed. That wasn't in the movie. Billy was extrapolating. Everybody turned into a baby, and all humanity, without exception, conspired biologically to produce two perfect people named Adam and Eve, he supposed.

Indeed.

Testing the new video blog feature.

Sorry, its been a while. But I just saw an item on the news, featuring Rosie O'Donnell's "video blog" and I thought to myself "Self, wouldn't it be cool if I could upload videos to my blog as well?"

So, whilst doing that, let me update for anyone who cares. Liam is now over ten months old and is massive. We just bought him (well.....us) a giant, inflatable 3-foot swimming pool for the backyard. We finished our patio out front - a nice, rustic flagstone patio (very "zen" as Cathy describes it), complete with a double Muskoka chair, which I painstakingly assembled and Cathy stained. We even dug up some of the grass and now have a nice garden in front of it. We now enjoy the view from the front of our home, now that the nice weather is here.

We took ten kids to OFSAA track and field this year and came back with a bronze medal (Lydia in the senior girls triple jump, again). Having said that, I am enjoying my hiatus as a club coach, but would like to return.

Anyhow, enjoy the video as I go mark exams!

Reflections on The Honourable Madam Justice Bertha Wilson

The first woman ever appointed to the Supreme Court of Canada, the Honourable Madam Justice Bertha Wilson, died this week at the age of 83. Madam Justice Wilson was perhaps best known for her contribution to the notorious (or famous) decision in the case of R. v. Morgentaler, the Supreme Court decision that effectively legalized abortion in Canada.

Wilson was able to play such a significant role in the development of this particular aspect of public policy thanks to the authority conferred upon her and her 8 unelected colleagues of the Supreme Court by virtue of the advent of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms and the power of full judicial authority. There remains much debate as to whether the Charter confers too much power on the courts. Indeed, this was an issue in the last federal election when Stephen Harper found himself in hot water for suggesting that "Liberal-appointed" judges would keep his government in check.

I remember the Morgentaler decision. I recall being disappointed because, at the time, I had some strong pro-life views. However, the decision also aroused the political science - and future law - student in me. It cause me to think about the question of the Charter and judicial review and whether or not the courts ought to have such power. I felt at the time they should not and continue to hold this view.

I have been drawn, strangely enough, into the critical legal theory camp known as the "legal realists", or those who believe that our legal system does not operate some form of social and/or political vacuum. Even Supreme Court judges cannot be free from ideological biases, as high a pedestal that we place them upon. They are learned (two syallables, Homer Simpson), educated, wise and dispassionate, but as human beings they are no less capable of being affected by their life experiences and world views as am I. Here's an excerpt from Madam Justice Wilson's decision in the Morgentaler case which I always felt betrayed a certain world view bias on her part. It certainly, at least in my estimation, involved her taking great liberties with the legal notion of "security of the person", moreso than I think the framers of the Charter might have intended:

In my opinion, the respect for individual decision-making in matters of fundamental personal importance reflected in the American jurisprudence also informs the Canadian Charter. Indeed, as the Chief Justice pointed out in R. v. Big M Drug Mart Ltd., beliefs about human worth and dignity "are the sine qua non of the political tradition underlying the Charter". I would conclude, therefore, that the right to liberty contained in s. 7 guarantees to every individual a degree of personal autonomy over important decisions intimately affecting their private lives.

The question then becomes whether the decision of a woman to terminate her pregnancy falls within this class of protected decisions. I have no doubt that it does. This decision is one that will have profound psychological, economic and social consequences for the pregnant woman. The circumstances giving rise to it can be complex and varied and there may be, and usually are, powerful considerations militating in opposite directions. It is a decision that deeply reflects the way the woman thinks about herself and her relationship to others and to society at large. It is not just a medical decision; it is a profound social and ethical one as well. Her response to it will be the response of the whole person.

It is probably impossible for a man to respond, even imaginatively, to such a dilemma not just because it is outside the realm of his personal experience (although this is, of course, the case) but because he can relate to it only by objectifying it, thereby eliminating the subjective elements of the female psyche which are at the heart of the dilemma.

Do we want to trust the unelected and, thus, unaccountable with vague notions of "security of the person" and "fundamental justice" when issues as important as abortion are under scrutiny? Are these not the questions we want in the public realm, where a greater consensus might be found? I'm not suggesting that Madam Justice Wilson was wrong on the straight public policy question of abortion. However, I question whether or not it was Wilson's - or any other Judge's matter - place to have the final legal say on it.

I found myself asking these similar questions in recent years, this time with the debate on same sex marriage. Here, I was in agreement with the Liberals on one question but not with another, and in disagreement with the Conservatives on the first question, but on their side with the latter. The questions: should we, as a society, recognize and condone same sex marriage? To this, my answer is an emphatic yes. Secondly: should the Supreme Court of Canada have the final say on the matter. To this, my answer is an emphatic no. As such, I supported the Liberals in their attempt to enact legislation which recognized same sex marriage; the first ever legislative attempt to define marriage in our country's history. However, I was disappointed when they went running to the Supreme Court of Canada to get their stamp of approval, as much as I understand the necessity of such in the current legal environment of full judicial review.

In terms of the Tories, I was and remain opposed to any attempt to revert the definition of marriage to the tradtional one of "one man to one woman to the exclusion of all others". However, I support Harper in his belief that it ought to be Parliament, and not the Supreme Court of Canada, who have the final say.

Perhaps the balance we have struck in Canada is the existence of the Notwithstanding Clause which technically gives Parliament (and provincial legislatures, of course) the final say. Nevertheless, the political risks in invoking the clause render this course an unlikely one, leaving the courts to rule the roost on many questions of public policy, such as abortion.

We lost a great Canadian this week, who has made a significant contribution to public life. However, I wonder if the power vested in her and her peers ought to have been there to begin with. In doing so, have we not abdicated our obligations and our rights as a democratic society?

God's Slow Death

Not much to blog about today. Except, I came across a really cool podcast from The Walrus magazine, which is a somewhat hoity-toity Canadian public affairs periodical along the lines of The Atlantic Monthly or Harper's.

Its a review of three books that challenge not only the existence of God, but also the various "design" theories purporting to support the presence of the almighty.

It almost makes me want to read all othree of them. Any road, here's the link to the podcast:

God's Slow Death podcast from The Walrus

The whole Don Imus thing

I'm having a real problem with the whole Don Imus controversy. Yes, I know there are probably more important world issues to be blogging about than the firing of a shock-jock-talk radio host, however I can't help but be bothered by the hypocrisy of the whole thing.

For those of you living under a rock, Imus was fired recently over some comments he made on the air, referring to the Rutgers University women's basketball team as "nappy-headed ho's". It was a less than tasteful attempt to refer, I gather, to the toughness and/or the imposing physical stature of the women. Offensive as the lexicon might have been, I don't think it was Imus' express intent to insult or belittle the team. I honestly think he was making an attempt to give the team a backhanded compliment.

Apparently, "nappy-headed" refers to the natural, untreated hairstyle of black (I hate the term "African-American") women, and...well...everyone knows what the connotation and denotation of the expression "ho" (short form for "whore") are. As much as anyone else, I think Imus had been desensitized to the significance of the word, as it has become ubiquitous particularly in the so-called "rap and hip-hop culture". And here's where the hypocrisy comes in.

Few have been the people who have called for the firing/cancelling of recording contracts of rap artists who sling the term "ho" (also "bitch" and "nigger") around like snowballs in the playground. Occasionally, you get the Tipper Gore anti-rock lyric types who raise objections, but I don't see artists like JaRule and Tupac and Eminem losing their jobs, much less any sleep, over the issue. I would certainly be much more prepared to listen to the likes of Reverends Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton, if they were to turn the spotlight on this segment of society who, to this point, have been immune to the collective hysterical disapprobation which did Don Imus in.

Why is it that rappers get off and Imus doesn't? Dare I suggest that the Al Sharptons and Jesse Jacksons of the world turn a blind eye to the rap community on the grounds of race? Do they look the other way because they don't want to be seen as bringing a fellow black man down? Is Imus a more convenient target because he is white?

Don't get me wrong. As someone who has coached female athletics for more than ten years, I feel very uncomfortable when women athletes are referred to as "ho's" as the most pointed way to describe their athletic prowess. I like to think that the English languages offers a lot more. However, I think an apology on the part of Mr. Imus would have sufficed. Unfortunately, Mr. Imus failed to realize that it is this sort of thing that becomes a make-work project for the blowhards, such as the Reverends Jackson and Sharpton. They seem to make a career in the spotlight of righteous indignation.

But until they become less selective, for the sake of politically correct convenience, in their targets of disapprobation, I prefer to ignore their shrill cries.....except insofar as they have inspired me to blog about the hypocrisy of it all.

Remembering Dinsdale

Friends:

It is with great sadness that I inform you that Dinsdale was put to sleep earlier this week, after a brief battle with bone cancer.

As many of you know, Dinsdale has been my best friend for over eight years and a part of our family since Cathy and I got together three years ago and since Liam joined us last August. He was the kindest and most loving friend anyone could have asked for. After a brief and less-than-stellar racing career in West Virginia, Dinsdale and I first met at a truck stop in "Nowhere", Pennsylvania when I accompanied members of GLOHW (Greyhound Lovers of Hamilton-Wentworth) to a meeting place where half a dozen retired racing greyhounds were to be rescued. We even had issues getting across the Canadian border that day, as Customs Officials wanted us to pay duty on the dogs!

From the moment that Dinsdale and I took the first walk (the other dogs either didn't want anything to do with me, or insisted on using me as a jungle gym!), he became an inextricable part of my life. He saw me through a stressful career change from law to teaching, and welcomed both Cathy and Liam as his new "stepmom" and "baby skin brother respectively". For five years, it was just he and I at our old one-bedroom apartment at 40 McKay Road. Since then, he has been a part of our family. Throughout the many changes that have taken place over the past decade, Dinsdale was the one constant. He will be missed.

There were some wonderful times, and some not so good ones. The former vastly outnumber the latter fortunately. Yes, he did make a dinner out of one of my other pets - a cockatiel - as many of you will remember. There were the times where a nasty case of the runs destroyed more than one carpet and area rug; he never would do it on the tile or hardwood! And there was the camping trip from Hell to Killarney where, if the mosquitoes that swelled up his face didn't kill him, the rocky trails and fall from the 10 foot high suspension bridge nearly did! And - for those of you in my extended track and field family - who can forget the havoc he wrought during those brief times I brought him to the track for practices or meets? I was able to make him bark and go crazy for years with a simple command of "On your marks......set......". You can't fault a sight hound for a natural chase instinct though,now can you?

However, the times were mostly good. I don't think we ever had more fun than the summer of 2003 when we spent a weekend at Sandbanks Provincial Park. There weren't many mosquitoes that weekend and I can still picture the abject joy with which Dinsdale chased his beloved "Jolly Ball" into the waters of Lake Ontario. We were able to do this a lot at Van Wagners Beach as well, near the Skyway Bridge. For a while, Dinsdale was a so-so jogging companion. He would let me get about a quarter of a mile ahead of him on the Rail Trail, remaining behind to sniff and pee in the bushes and then bolt with all of his sprinter's speed to catch me up in less than 20 seconds. Some of you will remember Dinsdale as the dog who could walk himself, insisting on taking the handle of his leash in his jaws on every walk, that is if he wasn't carrying his Jolly Ball to the park. And I won't even get into the strange glove fetish that he harboured. Suffice to say that I spent many a winter's walk with a bare hand tucked up the sleeve of my Gore-Tex jacket.

Dinsdale's favourite food was, without a doubt, cheese. He could actually discern the sound of it being take out of the refrigerator in its plastic packaging. You will be comforted to know that Dinsdale went earlier today with a belly full of it. Although he was in much discomfort in recent days, his final hours were peaceful and, thanks to the assistance of the staff at Chedoke Animal Hospital in Hamilton, was able to pass quietly in his dad's arms.

Believe, like I do, that Dinsdale is now running pain-free with the greyhound angels.

Now I must really close my story. Good-bye to the boys and girls who may read it and if it is not wrong for a dog to say it, I should like to add, "God bless you all." If in my feeble way I have been able to impress you with the fact that dogs and many other animals love their masters and mistresses, and live only to please them, my little story will not have been written in vain. My last words are: "Boys and girls, be kind to dumb animals, not only because you will lose nothing by it, but because you ought to; for they were placed on the earth by the same Kind Hand that made all living creatures.

-from "Beautiful Joe", by Marshall (really Margaret) Saunders

Shalimar the Clown, by Salman Rushdie

Shalimar the Clown - Salman Rushdie

If you have ever had occasion to read a work of Salman Rushdie, you will know what a challenge that can be. Rushdie is not for the mentally lazy.

However, if you take the time to get into his work, you will be rewarded with stories that are rich, imagery that is breathtaking and characters who are multidimensional. All three of these are present in Shalimar the Clown.

Shalimar traces the life of an ordinary theatre performer who grew up in the dipsuted Kashmir province of India (or ...Pakistan) an area that is frequently described throughout the novel as a mountainous winter wonderland. All is good with Shalimar, the main character and his life seems perfect when the family of the beautiful Boonyi accept his marriage proposal.

However, life takes a turn for the worse for Shalimar at the same time as Kashmir is plunged into darkness through war end ethnic conflict. Boonyi is seduced by the American Ambassador to India, Max Ophuls, whose own life Rushdie describes in a historical context that keeps the reader rivetted. Boonyi would bear the Ambassador a daughter, with whom the novel both begins and ends. As his village is engulfed in the violence that was and is the India-Pakistan conflict - exacerbated by the newly-minted Indian general, Hammirdev Kachhaha, whose affections Boonyi had spurned years before, Shalimar swears his revenge.

The non-linear novel reads like a Quentin Tarantino film, jumping in parts from one historical period to the other; beginning with modern-day Los Angeles and Shalimar's ultimate vindication over his romantic rival, Max Ophuls, jumping back to Second World War Vichy France and the coming-of-age of the German-born Ambassador, to the interim decades in peaceful and then war-torn Kashmir, and then coming full-circle to modern-day Los Angeles and the realization of India/Kashmir Ophuls of the checkered history of her family.

As difficult as the story is sometimes to follow - again, the reader must be patient and attentive with Rushdie, it is a fantastic story for those who are interested in modern Asian (and European) history and for those who just like a good story of love, betrayal and revenge.

French immersion

Recently, there was a successful lobby to establish French immersion programs in both Dundas and Waterdown. Classes are scheduled to begin this fall.

The decision by the Hamilton-Wentworth District School Board attracted modest media attention. Cathy, Liam and I got on Board after hearing about the efforts indirectly at the Dundas Cactus Festival this past summer. We signed up, attended some meetings and intend on enrolling Liam for September 2011 (he's only six months old at this point).

Discussion around French immersion has brought out the usual types who oppose anything French and believe it cripples kids' ability to function in English (please!). Have a look at this gem of a letter to the Hamilton Spectator from someone in Burlington (go figure) who feels that its good enough for people to "get by" with English, and who needs any other language:

Letter from Burlington man opposed to French immersion

Naturally, I was compelled to respond. I kept my comments brief, as I know they prefer it that way in the editorial room at the Spec. Its times like this I wish I was still writing for the Spec's Community Editorial Board:

Editor,

I beg to differ with the letter writer who decried the "abysmal lack of proper English usage" in his objection to the revival of interest in French immersion in Hamilton.

I would hope that we, as parents and teachers, aspire to more for our children than having them simply "get by quite well with just English". Granted, the international language of business and technology may becoming more and more anglicized, but the imminent linguistic genocide of other languages, like French, is a little further away than the letter-writer seems to have suggested.

Employment in the public service, even employment prospects themselves, need not be the primary motivator for enrolling one's son or daughter in French immersion. Becoming conversant in French is of unquantifiable advantage in a country like Canada, or in a world where it is the second most influential language. Promoting French is not only a matter of national unity, but a shot in the arm for global citizenship. Or am I in the wrong country? Or on the wrong planet?

Furthermore, the fact is literacy skills in a second or third language complement, and in even enhance those in the first language. The letter writer needn't worry about French sucking the life out of English language skills. It isn't a zero-sum proposition. So, call me a snob but my son starts immersion in September 2011. I'm sorry the letter writer's children (or grandchildren) may miss out.

I hope they print my letter, too.

iTunes. Why can I only buy Canadian?

(The following I wrote in response to a piece that appeared in "Raise the Hammer", an on-line publication out of Hamilton, Ontario. The article juxtaposed the advent of the Apple Corporation's new "iPhone" with the development of the "Childrens Machine", a third world-directed product being made under the ausipices of the "one computer per child" movement. The article made me think of something else a little more, well, selfish in any event). If you want to read the original article go here:


Interesting piece. Not to stray to far from the topic at hand, but I have a comment/question about iTunes and digital rights.

I firmly believe in paying artists for their work by not using on-line services to share music files. As such, I purchase only from Napster and iTunes (and other artist official sites). Well....mostly iTunes because I like how music synchs seamlessly with my iPod, which I love, which I know is evil at some levels.

However, other iTunes users will know that each country has its own iTunes store. With a Canadian address on my credit card, I can buy only from the Canadian iTunes store. Why is that? The U.S. iTunes store has all sorts of stuff, like movies and TV shows which I cannot pay for legitimately. The U.K. store has all sorts of music I'd love to purchase, but can't because it isn't available in the Canadian store.

Can someone explain to me why, with the technology we have, I am not able to purchase these things? Doesn't iTunes U.K./U.S. want my money? What sort of "rights" things are going on here? I just don't get it.

Its Christmastime. Time to blog about the Leafs

Let's leave the silly topic of politics behind and log about something equally as important - the Leafs.

They have had me banging my head against the wall for the better part of thirty years now. They still haven't won the Stanley Cup in my lifetime, and I'm starting to get grey hairs. This season seems a lot like the last; they came out of the gates really well but have fizzled of late and will be hard-pressed to make the playoffs.

I thought the Leafs were a much better team than last year's version for one simple equation: Lindros out, Peca in. However, the Leafs have been decimated by a recent rash of injuries, not least of which is Michael Peca himself, out likely until the playoffs (if the Leafs even make the playoffs).

I think the best Leaf currently is Chad Kilger (pictured above). He's the type of grinder I, for one, really like. Having said that, Sundin has been on a tear of late, scoring six goals in his last five games, including two this evening in a 5-1 rollicking of those nasty Boston Bruins. I like the type of player that is Kilger; multi-dimensional. He can score goals (usually in spurts), but also grinds away in the corner and finishes checks. He's a lesser version of Darcy Tucker, who just returned from an injury. Between Kilger, Tucker, Peca and, more recently, Boyd Devereaux, I think the Leafs have the makings of a team that could go deep into the playoffs - if they can get there.

As it stands, their blueline is vastly over-rated if not also overpaid. I really don't care what McCabe and Kaberle (whom I like to pronounce "kuh-BERL") do on the powerplay, they're not doing the meat and potatoes job they're supposed to on defence. And they get far too much ice time. Although Hal Gill and Ian White (aka "Fred and Barney") started the season well, their play has been, for the most part, inconsistent. Pavel Kubina just isn't the blue chip defencemen he was with Tampa Bay in 04'. Thankfully, Carlo Coliacovo (I never was able to spell it properly), is back from a long-term injury and I think he's really bolstered their defensive corps.

Goaltending: Andrew Raycroft just isn't Eddie Balfour, nor Curtis Joseph. End of story. The textbook on beating hims is quite brief: the words "HIGH, GLOVE SIDE" written in large font, upper case letters. JS Aubin had a nice run last spring, when Eddie went down, but he just isn't a goaltender that's going to get you very deep into the playoffs, and nor is Raycroft. Maybe they should trade both of them to the Sen-NOT-ors (God I hate the Ottawa Senators! Even more than I ever hated the Canadiens).

As for Captain Mats himself, I still remember where I was when I heard he had been traded to the Leafs. It was in my law school days and some classmates and I were in a movie theatre in Victoria in the summer when one of them broke the news to me that Sundin had been traded to the Leafs for....Wendel Clark!!!!! Aghhhhhh!!!!!!!!! was the only conceivable response at the time, as Wendel had been the heart and soul of the franchise for almost a decade. Now here he was, off to the Quebec Nordiques.

What's relevant about all of that is how long ago it was: 1994....June. In fact, Mats didn't even suit up for the Blue and White until the following January, as the first half of that season was lost to a lockout. 1994....almost thirteen years ago. Sundin has toiled that long for the boys in blue. This leads me to believe that, should the Leafs not have a decent shot at making the playoffs by the beginning of March, captain Mats will waive his no-trade clause and be shipped off to a Cup contender. Some observers have suggested the Disney Ducks (I don't care that their official names has been changed to the "Anaheim Ducks", they will always be the "Disney Ducks of Anaheim" to me).

They've been charting his scoring progress for the Leafs as of late, moving up the all-time lists for both goals and points. I think he's still number 2 all-time for the Leafers, still behind my boyhood idol, Darryl Sittler.

Hey speaking of Darryl Sittler, Cathy and I made a trip to St. Jacob's last summer just before baby Liam was born. She wanted to go to the big market there, and I thought it would be neat to go see the boyhood home of my hockey hero. We had a tourist map which showed where it was but, when we got there we weren't quite certain which house it was. It wasn't as if there was a big sign with the words "BOYHOOD HOME OF DARRYL SITTLER" emblazoned on it.

Wonder if I'll ever get to Sweden to see Mats Sudin's boyhood home? Or at least Chad Kilger's.

Stéphane Dion, Canada's next Prime Minister.....NOT!!!

The Liberal Party of Canada seems to think they have elected Canada's next Prime Minister over the weekend. Not if I can help it.

What does it say about a party who's winning leadership candidate is the one a majority of convention delegates dislikes the least? An acceptable second-choice - the most inoffensive option - seems to be an appropriate way to go for a second-rate party. This doesn't bode terribly well for the next election; two uncharismatic policy wonks going to toe to (snore.....) toe in the leadership debates. Is it just me or is the idea of Jack Layton being the most likeable party leader just a tad scary? Reminiscent of the Ed Broadbent days, at the very least. For the love of god, somebody invite Green Party leader, Elizabeth May, to the show!

I didn't think Dion was going to win it. I, like many of the pundits, thought that Bob Rae was grabbing much of the momentum leading up to the vote (not that the endorsement of Joe Volpe amounts to anything even remotely resembling momenutm). I figured the winning candidate would have been between Rae and Michael Ignatieff (whose last name roughly translates into "damned Ukrianians and Jews" in English), with the ultimate winner being he who had the smaller anti-me movement. Turns out, both the anti-Rae and anti-Iggy votes were larger than expected, as they all seemed to flock, like lemmings, to Dion.

Perhaps that's too unkind. I think the story of the convention was Gerrard Kennedy. After having blown a huge fourth quarter (wait, this is Canada)...third period lead ten years ago in the Ontario Liberal leadership convention, he proved to be THE deciding force. Not only did he ultimately play kingmaker in a personal capacity, but he was able to deliver the goods, in the form of delegates. This has been less of a certainty in recent years.

You have to figure, however, that the Rae-Iggy friendship is over. "Friendship over delegates" my ass! Rae gave him the ultimate slap in the face, by not giving him - his former university roommate - at least a personal endorsement, if not that of his delegation. Having said that, the anti-Rae and anti-Iggy crowd tended to be a mutually exclusive lot, now didn't they?

Whatever Iggy did to court the gay vote, I don't know, but he did ultimately sway Scott Brison and George Smitherman to his camp. Or course, I think the latter was just the inadvertent result of the Ignatieff camp passing out free baggies of crystal meth. in an attempt to attract youth delegates, but who's to say? So, what's next for Scott Brison? A leadership run for the N.D.P. or the Greens? More fittingly, perhaps it should be the Monster, Raving Loony Party. Wait, you need U.K. citizenship for that.

On a final note, I couldn't help but be fixated on Belinda Stronach's dye job the whole weekend. I guess she got tired of the blond jokes. Either that or she's emulating the career of her favourite female role-model, Christina Aguilera. However, did anyone else notice how straight the do was Friday evening, and then how frizzy, JBF throughout Saturday? I guess Tie was in town that weekend for the Leafs-Canadiens tilt at the Bell Centre.