Trudeau Government's Policy on Syrian Refugees is Ludicrous

I have a friend from Syria who used to live here in Toronto.  We met each other through work and eventually became very good friends.  A few years ago, however, she was deported from Canada because she got bad advice from an immigration consultant.  She went back to live in Syria's capital, Damascus.  About one year later, the Syrian civil war began and my friend's life has been in danger ever since.  She wants desperately to come back to Canada, but until now she has been stonewalled in her attempts to return.  Meanwhile, Justin Trudeau's Liberal government has seen fit to bring in thousands of other refugees from Syria in a matter of months. So my friend who speaks fluent English and who has lived here, worked here, volunteered here and paid taxes here can't come back. But thousands of other Syrians who have never set foot in this country, don't speak either official language and are unfamiliar with Canadian values and customs?  No problem, bring 'em in!  That's the Trudeau government's logic.  

The fact that my friend can't return to Canada pisses me off enough.  But what's worse is that the Trudeau Liberals just let thousands of refugees pour into the country without a plan to feed, clothe and shelter them.  Indeed, many of the Syrian refugees who have arrived in Canada are having to rely on food banks and other assistance from humanitarian organizations since they're getting little to no help from the feds.  Yet Trudeau's government has decided that it prefers to take in government-sponsored refugees rather than privately sponsored ones, which is why private sponsors are still waiting for what seems like forever to get their applications processed.  Does this sound stupid to anyone else?

It also doesn't make sense that our federal government is seemingly not interested in helping some of Syria's most vulnerable refugees - ethnic and religious minorities.  In an article in today's Toronto Star, opposition politicians condemned the Liberal government for sitting on their hands and doing nothing to help Syria's Yazidis, a religious minority group that has been relentlessly targeted by the so-called Islamic State terrorist group (see: MPs clash over how Canada can help Yazidis).  They are the victims of genocide, yet the Liberals won't rush to bring any of them into Canada as they did with the thousands of refugees already here.  

So let's summarize the Liberals' priorities when it comes to Syrian refugees.  Who is not a priority? Anyone like my friend who has already lived here and contributed to Canadian society; privately sponsored refugees who will rely on support from their sponsors rather than on handouts from government and humanitarian organizations; and lastly, members of ethnic and religious minorities, like the Yazidis, who face genocide at the hands of terrorist groups like Islamic State.  Who is a priority?  Government-sponsored refugees, who will arrive in Canada with little scrutiny and rely almost exclusively on meager government support and handouts from humanitarian groups.  

By now you might be asking, why are the feds' priorities so mixed up when it comes to Syria's refugees?  The answer is that the Liberal government doesn't really care which refugees come into this country, so long as they think that these refugees will vote Liberal come election time, should they become Canadian citizens.

European Union Needs Democratic Reform to Survive

It's been just over two weeks since the citizens of the United Kingdom voted to leave the European Union.  Now that we know the EU faces a future without Britain as a member, a lot of people have started to speculate whether Brexit could lead to a domino effect of other member states voting to leave the political and economic bloc.  Leaders throughout the EU are calling for referendums in their own countries.  Some have even speculated that Brexit is the beginning of the end for the EU.  I do think it's possible that a couple of other countries may have votes on whether to stay in the bloc or leave it, but I don't believe the EU will collapse in the near future.  Note, however, that I emphasize, near future.  If something isn't done in the long term to reform the institutions of the bloc, I do think it is possible that it could fall apart in the next decade or two.  So what needs to happen?  In short, I believe that the EU needs to reform its institutions to bring in more democratization and more accountability towards EU citizens.

The EU Needs More Democracy:

I think it's ironic that a political and economic bloc that is entirely composed of modern, democratic countries is actually very undemocratic in some ways.  It is also very distant from the very citizens whose lives it affects.  The EU does have the European Parliament,  which is directly elected by the citizens of EU member states.  That being said, the parliament's powers are extremely limited.  In fact, it doesn't even have legislative powers.  It does have the power to approve laws, but only laws that have already been proposed - proposed, that is, by the European Commission, which is the real law-making body of the EU; one that is not democratically elected, but rather composed of bureaucrats or "commissioners" chosen on the advice of the governments of each member state. They are not directly elected by EU citizens, yet it is them who are responsible for making the laws that effect each and every person living in the bloc.  So it's no wonder why so many people in the EU feel alienated by the institutional processes of the organization.  Indeed, all they see is a bunch of unelected bureaucrats sitting in far away in Brussels, making rules on issues that affect their daily lives, without any democratic mandate.

What I would suggest is that the European Parliament be given the power to both propose and approve laws, instead of simply having the power to approve laws suggested by the European Commission.  In essence, the EU parliament would have the same power to legislate as any national parliament would.  Any law would still have to be approved by the Council of the European Union, as is the case today, so that national governments represented by their ministers would retain the right to protect their national interests.  Approval of laws by the EU Commission, however, would not be required.

Ultimately, I believe that it is democratization that will save the European Union from falling into the dustbin of history.  But it is imperative that Europe's leaders begin work on bringing more democracy to the bloc as soon as possible, because right now it is opponents of European integration that have the momentum.

So You Want a Dog, Eh?

Aside from my obsession with politics, I would have to say that my next greatest interest is dogs.  I grew up with dogs and now have a dog of my own, who I just love to bits.  I've spent a lot of time learning about dogs, their behaviour, their breeds and so forth.  In the last couple of years, I've had the privilege of volunteering with several dog rescue organizations and I am always eager to help anyone who is considering getting a canine companion.  That being said, I'm actually not going to use this blog post to talk about why you should get a dog.  Instead, I'm going to talk about why you shouldn't have a dog.  The reason I'm doing this is that a lot of people would love to get a dog, but only some of them are ready to have one.

When you come across a cute, cuddly little puppy, you might think to yourself, "I want one of those." It's the same reaction that you might have if you see a nice pair of shoes or a really elegant dress. Children are especially susceptible to this kind of thinking, because they just don't know better. Unfortunately, a lot of adults don't know much better than children and may end up getting a dog on impulse without doing their homework and finding out what needs to be done in order to take care of Fido properly.  And what happens when people don't know how to properly care for a dog? Usually, nothing good.  Some of them are severely neglected and even abused.  Some of them are abandoned by their owners and end up in overcrowded shelters, where they risk being euthanized in a matter of days or hours.  All because there are a lot of idiots out there who think getting a dog is just like getting a new piece of furniture or a new car.

So what does it mean to be a responsible dog owner?  In short, it means giving your dog sufficient food and water, giving it adequate exercise, which includes both physical and mental stimulation.  It also includes properly socializing your dog with people and other pets, not to mention training it to be well-mannered inside and outside your home.  Lastly, you must provide your dog with the veterinary care that it needs to keep being a happy, healthy dog.  None of these things are easy to do and all of them require a commitment for the dog's entire lifetime.

Giving your dog sufficient food and water is probably the easiest task of a responsible dog owner.  Or is it?  Sometimes, making sure Rover is well-fed and has enough to drink isn't as easy as it sounds. Your dog might be a picky eater and it may take you a while to convince him to eat the food set down for him.  The food that you give your dog might also disagree with him and he may throw it up all over your nice Persian rug, which means that not only will you be paying a hefty cleaning bill for your rug, but you'll also have to keep searching and paying for dog food until you find the right one that suits your dog's stomach.  That's gonna be expensive.  In fact, it might be even more expensive if your dog has some sort of allergy and requires special food that will inevitably cost more.  You may even have to get food that only your vet can prescribe, and trust me, your vet will charge you an arm and a leg, but we'll get to that later.

Okay, so now that Rover has his food and water, you can rest easy, right?  News flash, folks.  A dog is not a fish that you can just feed and leave for the rest of the day.  Your dog will need exercise and probably lots of it, especially if he's a young pup.  So you better get used to waking up early in the morning.  How's 6 am for ya?  Maybe even earlier, depending on how strong your dog's bladder is, or whenever he decides he wants to wake up and start his day.  Now if you're lucky, you may be able to let your four-legged friend out in the backyard to do his business and run around a little bit before you head off to work.  But maybe your among the growing number of dog owners who don't have a backyard.  That means you're probably going to have to take your furry pal out on a leash. Just imagine, it's the middle of winter, still dark out and minus twenty degrees.  No way you're going out there, right?  But guess what?  Fido still has to go do his business and get some exercise. How about when you come home from work dead tired and just want to crash on the couch.  Tough luck! Because your dog has been waiting for you to get home all day and he's itching for a long walk and playtime.  You may be able to get a reprieve from your dog if you hire a dog walker to take him out during the day while you're working, but of course that'll cost you a pretty penny.  So if you want a dog, be prepared for early mornings, late evenings and a lot less down time.

You might even have to sacrifice even more time if your dog ends up having any behavioural issues. Say your dog doesn't play nice with other dogs, or he's not good on a leash.  If you're a responsible dog owner, you won't just ignore these kinds of bad behaviours.  Before you know it, you might be sacrificing your hockey game during the night because you need to take your dog to obedience classes, not to mention the fact that it's going to mean more money out of your pocket.

Actually, the money you spend on feeding and training will probably be the least you spend on your four-legged friend, because you haven't even been to the vet yet!  The fact of the matter is that if you want a dog, you should be prepared to spend a lot of money on veterinary care.  And I mean A LOT of money.  Simply paying for routine vet expenses like vaccines can cost a small fortune.  And if your dog requires any type of surgery, you'll likely be shelling out thousands.  You can get pet insurance which may help you with some of the vet bills, but just like health insurance in the U.S., there's a lot of fine print, deductibles and exclusions, which means that your dog may not be covered for all cases in which he needs vet care.  Tragically, many dogs end up in shelters or are even euthanized because their owners cannot afford the vet care they need to keep them healthy and happy.

To make a long story short, having a dog requires a lot of patience, a lot of time and a lot of money. It also requires a big commitment on your part to take care of the dog for its entire lifetime; not until he gets too big or too old, not until you have that newborn baby, and not until you move someplace else; for his ENTIRE lifetime.  If you don't have the patience, time or money to commit to a dog and can't commit to taking care of a dog for its entire life, then my advice to you is simple: Don't get a dog.      

Canada Should Join the European Union

It's been just over a week since the people of the United Kingdom made what I believe was a terrible decision to leave the European Union.  In fact, as I mentioned in my previous blog post, May Brexit Spell the End of the United Kingdom and the British Empire, the vote by the British to leave the EU may even lead to the breakup of their country.  Time will tell what Brexit will ultimately do to the U.K.  In any event, the EU has suffered a devastating blow at a time when it is still dealing with severe economic problems and an ongoing refugee crisis.  The political and economic bloc could really use a pick-me-up.  And this is where I think Canada can help.

Canada as it is now is a tiny economy compared to the giant juggernaut to the south that we call the United States of America.  Canada's economy is heavily dependent on what happens in the U.S., as is the defense of our country.  After all, there's no way Canada could fight potential future military aggression by Russia or China without American help.  We have very much in common with our American neighbours, yet we continually struggle to distinguish ourselves from them.  Indeed, I think there is even more that makes us distinct from Americans than makes us like them.  Things like universal health care and more tolerance for historically marginalized groups of people, such as visible minorities and members of the LGBTQ community.  To tell you the truth, I think we're a lot more similar to the folks in the European Union than we are to our southern neighbours, which is why I would recommend that Canada enter negotiations to join the EU.

Okay, I understand that Canada is not physically part of Europe, but as we should all know, much of this country's heritage is rooted in Europe.  Canada is of course a product of European colonialism, for better or for worse.  Most of our population also has European origins, although I understand that this is changing rapidly as most of our immigration hasn't come from Europe for a long time now. Nevertheless, Canada still has strong cultural ties to Europe.  We also have strong political ties to the continent as members of NATO and other Western-led organizations.  Furthermore, although the U.S. is by far Canada's largest trading partner, we still do billions of dollars in trade with several EU countries (including the U.K. while it is still part of the bloc).  In fact, now would be a great opportunity to negotiate with the EU about joining as we are currently in negotiating a free trade agreement with them.

Being members of the EU would have tremendous advantages for Canada.  First of all, our businesses would gain unfettered access to a market of over 400 million people, which is a bigger market than that of the U.S. with a population in excess of 300 million.  I should also mention that many European businesses may opt to relocate some of their operations here to take advantage of labour and production costs that are cheaper than in some EU states.  This could mean jobs for a lot of Canadians.  Furthermore, Canadians would also be allowed to live and work freely in any EU country, which would mean a lot more work opportunities for Canadians abroad, without the bother of passports or work permits.  

I know that there are plenty of folks out there who would argue that it makes more sense to integrate more closely with the U.S. because they are our largest trading partner and are physically much closer to us than Europe.  But the reality is that Canada's values are more in sync with Europe's when it comes to things like social justice, environmental policies and various other political and social issues.  Personally, I would prefer to be more closely integrated with people who also have universal health care systems, strong environmental protection policies and progressive tax systems, rather than get closer to a country that gives a person like Donald Trump respectability and legitimacy.  

Canada Must Endure as a Country of Values or Cease to Exist

Tomorrow is Canada Day.  Canada is a very dynamic country; a great country.  But it's just a country, not a nation.  The reason I say this is that the word "nation" for me means a group of people with a common language, ancestry and history.  But the people of Canada don't have any of these.  All Canadians, with the exception of the country's aboriginal population, are descended from people originating in different lands.  In other words, Canada is a country of immigrants - immigrants from every corner of the world.  Many would argue that it is Canada's multicultural make-up that is the country's ultimate strength.  Former Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau thought so.  In fact, he practically made multiculturalism the country's state ideology.  But history has shown that multicultural countries, which I sometimes refer to as multinational empires, are usually unstable and can often become failed states, which is why countries whose borders were drawn up by colonial powers, like those of the Middle East and Africa, are home to so much violent conflict and instability. 

Canada is of course a country drawn up by colonial powers and built on the foundations of conquered aboriginal nations.  But unlike other multinational empires, most of Canada's people live in this country because either they or their descendants chose to be here.  In contrast, millions of people in today's multi-ethnic states didn't choose to become part of those states, but rather were forcibly included in the territories of such states.  For example, the Kurds of the Middle East never consented to being part of artificial creations like Iraq and Syria.  One could say the same thing about aboriginal populations in Canada, but aside from them, no one else in this country was forced to be part of it. This is one of the reasons why Canada has continued to exist and to prosper.

Another reason is that while Canadians come from many different backgrounds, the overwhelming majority of us share the same values - values like freedom of speech, freedom of religion, gender equality and so forth.  In fact, I would say that if a country does not have a homogeneous population that shares a common language, a common culture, a common history, etc., it must be a country of shared values, otherwise it will likely cease to exist.  Hence, if Canada wants to continue existing as a country, it must maintain a population whose overwhelming majority share what we would consider Canadian values.  My fear, however, is that because of certain policies brought on by successive governments in this country over the last half century, Canada may soon no longer have a population with shared values.

One of these policies is the official multiculturalism that Pierre Trudeau introduced during his tenure as prime minister.  As part of this new state ideology, Canada's immigration controls were relaxed to allow more people from places like Asia and Africa to come live in the country and become Canadian citizens.  Up until the Trudeau era, most immigrants to Canada came from Europe as immigration from other parts of the world was severely restricted and those non-Europeans who managed to come and stay in Canada faced horrible discrimination.  I certainly don't have a problem with the fact that a person can immigrate to Canada and in time can become a Canadian citizen regardless of where he or she comes from.  If I did have a problem with this, I'd be a bigot, and the last time I checked, my name isn't Donald Trump.  In fact, I mentioned in my Canada Day blog post last year, What Makes Canada Great?, that one of the great things about this country is that anyone has the potential to be a Canadian regardless of where they come from.

What I'm worried about is that since Pierre Trudeau introduced multiculturalism as Canada's new state ideology, adherents of it have used it as a pretext to look the other way whenever certain folks come to this country, become citizens and then try to impose customs and practices that are out of sync with Canada's values.  In essence, multiculturalism has become the card that its proponents will always use to justify bringing people into this country who don't believe in things like democracy, freedom of religion or gender equality.  My fear is that if this continues, Canada as we know it may cease to exist.                 

Five Cents for a Plastic Bag!? This Canadian is Tired of Being Nickeled and Dimed!

Today, I went to Shoppers Drug Mart to buy a couple of things and was asked by the cashier if I wanted to "purchase" a bag.  I said no, because in my opinion, charging a five cent bag fee is just another way big corporations are squeezing more profits out of their customers.  To make matters worse, this is a practice that's been encouraged by some of our incompetent politicians.  The pandora's box of bag fees was opened in Toronto when then mayor David Miller and his band of leftist councillors decided to make all retailers in Toronto charge a five cent fee per plastic bag. But as if this wasn't bad enough for Joe the taxpayer, the new rule didn't require retailers to turn the money over to the city or use it for environmentally-friendly initiatives, despite the fact that the whole argument in favour of the bag fee revolved around reducing the use of plastics that harm the environment. Instead, retailers could keep the money from the bag fees, which is exactly what most of them did, even after the city cancelled the mandatory fee years later. Now just to be fair, some retailers do voluntarily donate some of the money from the bag fees to environmental causes.  But for the most part, the money from the five cents per bag that people in Toronto and elsewhere pay is going straight into the pockets of big retailers.  As if the big multi-billion dollar retail giants don't charge us enough for their goods already at a time where more and more people are having trouble making ends meet.  

Okay, I understand that this is an old issue and that many people have grown used to this ridiculous example of nickel and diming.  The truth is that most of us just shrug and accept it.  This is the unfortunate case with many other dumb charges that big companies use to gouge Canadians. Remember when you didn't have to pay fuel surcharges and baggage fees at the airport?  How about when the airlines used to feed us for free on short-haul flights?  Or when you didn't have to pay to receive paper bills?  And please don't get me started on all those banking and credit card fees!  I think the real question here is, why do we let this happen?  Why do Canadians allow big corporations to levy such ludicrous charges so that they can squeeze more profits out of us?  The simple answer is that we don't complain loud enough about it to the point where our politicians can hear us and make laws to stop big business from nickel and diming us to death.  Unfortunately, the word is out that Canadians will pay more for everything.     

End Partisan Government Advertising!

Have you seen the self-serving, totally partisan ads that Ontario's Liberal government has been putting on TV lately?  The ones advertising some of the government's most controversial policies, like the proposed Ontario pension plan, the revised provincial sex ed curriculum and the government's clean energy policies.  One of the latest ads features a bunch of small children talking about the threats posed by climate change.  Up until recently, these kinds of ads were illegal in Ontario.  But then the government tweaked the law to allow them.  Now just to be fair, Kathleen Wynne's Liberals aren't the only ones guilty of showering voters with ads designed to make us feel good about their policies.  Other parties play the same game and play it just as well.

Does anyone remember those annoying TV ads by the Harper Conservatives?  The ads sang the praises of the so-called Economic Action Plan, much of which hadn't even been approved by parliament, hence the small and much less noticeable text in the commercials that read, "subject to parliamentary approval."  One of my favourite examples is from around twenty years ago during the days of the Mike Harris government in Ontario.  The then slash-and-burn premier talked a great deal about wasteful spending, but he had no problem spending our tax dollars on signs that proudly proclaimed, "Your Ontario Tax Dollars at Work."  

The fact of the matter is that governments of all stripes engage in self-serving partisan advertising paid for by our tax dollars.  This is a practice that has to end and end now!  So whenever you see one of those pathetic commercials talking about how much of a great job our politicians are supposedly doing, keep telling yourself to remember our leaders' cynical use of our hard-earned money come voting day.  Better yet, forget about waiting until the next election.  Instead, shout out to our politicians over the phone, through the mail or on social media and tell them to stop wasting the taxpayer's money on partisan ads.  If politicians want to pat themselves on the back in the media, they should use their own parties' funds to do it, not ours!