I’ve written about copyright several times before. Now I write more.

The Harper Government, now in a substantially more powerful majority position in the House of Commons, are poised to reintroduce the copyright legislation that died on the table last May. According to Michael Geist, the Canada Research Chair in Internet and E-Commerce Law, the bill will be introduced in the exact same form it was left in before the election.

This is a problem.

To be fair, the most recent incarnation of the Conservative’s copyright reform has been, by far, the most balanced we’ve seen out of that government. They’ve tried before, several times, to introduce copyright reform legislation and always met with an enormous backlash of public opinion. After the latest bill was introduced Industry Minister Tony Clement made a concerted and very public effort to consult with groups that had expressed concern and hear them out. He heard them out and it seemed that he was really listening, but then the election was called, the writ dropped, and the bill met an untimely death.

The problem with the bill being reintroduced in the form it was last left in is that there were glaring—enormous(!)—issues with that bill. Through concerted consultation Mr. Clement discovered these issues. But this time around, according to the Harper Government, no consultations will be made.

In other words, they know the bill is broken, their previous consultations told them so, but they aren’t fixing a thing. Not a thing. Nothing changed or reworded or rejigged after all those consultations. Which really makes you wonder if it wasn’t all just window dressing from a government that, as a minority, really didn’t have a choice. They acted to appease; when push comes to shove, they don’t have to act anymore.

So the bill is broken. While it’s protections are, for the most part, fair and reasonable, the “digital locks” provision which has been in the legislation since the beginning is a fatal flaw.

To put it simply, despite any protections and provisions for consumers that exist in the law, if a piece of media is protected by a so-called digital lock, all consumer rights are null and void.

However, it gets much worse. In the midst of the Conservative’s last push for copyright reform cables released by Wikileaks reveal that the Harper Government actually lobbied to be put on a U.S. copyright watch list. Yes, if you can believe that. The Harper Government actually requested that we be put on an American copyright watch list—a list of prolific copyright violaters—that includes countries like China and Russia. We are on that list, at the request of the Harper Government, under the assumption that public pressure from the Americans would perhaps help pass the legislation through to law. Our government, lobbying a foreign government, to put pressure on our citizens. It seems pretty unreal.

So, there is a lot to worry about. We have a bad bill coming down the pipe. One that was introduced before, protested against strongly, and despite consultation was not amended in any form. And we have a government that, if the cables indicate anything, will do whatever it takes to push through this reform into law. For what it’s worth, both the Liberals and the New Democrats were opposed to the legislation the last time around. There’s also an enormous, well-organized protest movement that mobilized in the past and remains very active and energized. So, if nothing else, we can at least hope that the passage of this bill won’t exactly go quietly.

I wrote recently, in response to an article by Warren Kinsella, that merging the left wing of Canadian politics, while an immediate possibility, also possibly sucks.

My concerns are simple and, again, I reluctantly point you towards the American example. An example where a two-party system is beginning to demonstrate obvious flaws when put to the test. The far-right wing of the Republican Party—the Tea Party—is, in my opinion, threatening the collapse of the Republicans as we know it. From within.

In Canada, I worry that a merger of the left—a new party formed from the NDP and the Liberals—may result in something very similar. An eventual breakdown of the party from within its own ranks and the more fringe interests fight to be heard.

Without a doubt, the policy platforms of the New Democrats and the Liberals have become increasingly similar. In fact, neither are very dissimilar from the essentials of the Conservative Party. It’s all a matter of the creep towards the middle ground, something that all parties are guilty of. Terrible leadership aside, one of the problems plaguing the Liberals in recent elections may very well be the fact that the party that was once king of the middle ground is losing out as other parties creep in.

Nonetheless, a merger between the New Democrats and the Liberals would be, in a word, simple. And, lately, the rumours are flying.

Read the rest of this article »

It wasn’t what I expected to hear as I stepped out onto the deck, blinking back the blinding Alberta sun.

“Jack Layton is dead.”

Maria and I spent the last week, from Friday until this past Saturday, out in Alberta seeing family. I spent the weekend that Jack died whipping around a lake on a Seadoo, sitting around the fire, and enjoying the company of Maria’s Albertan relations. A world away from our place here in Cambridge, from work (for Maria), and, in the way that only a good vacation can make you feel, from reality.

In that context—the context of being away from everything—news of Jack Layton’s dead was even more of a shock.

We were starved for information. On Monday afternoon we got on the road again, on our way to Maria’s grandparent’s bed and breakfast in Three Hills, Alberta, and we searched in frustration for the local CBC station. When we finally found it we listened, and listened. It became clear, quickly, that it was all too real. That the cancer must’ve been far worse than it appeared to be even at Jack’s last press conference, even when he stepped back from the helm, temporarily. But it had come so quickly, without warning, and it seemed to be impossible that Jack was really gone. Like that.

Jack Layton, who had led the New Democrats to mind-bogglingly incredible new heights. Who had taken Quebec by storm. Who had achieve what would have been nearly unthinkable even a year ago.

The thing that amazes me most about all the tributes that have been pouring in for Jack over the past week is the amount of people saying the same thing. Jack Layton was the reason why I first voted. Jack Layton was the reason I became interested in politics.

And the funny thing is, it’s true for me too.

It was in January 2003 and I must’ve been home one weekend from university; the start of the second semester of my first year. I remember clearly watching the NDP Leadership Convention on TV. It was the first political thing I ever did.

Jack Layton’s leaves behind a pretty substantial legacy. He led his party to historic highs, he inspired Canadians—especially, I think, young people and the marginalized—to become  interested in politics, and he was a genuine and kind person in the midst of politics.

But if the gossip out of yesterday’s Liberal caucus meetings have any substance behind them (and these things normally do) then Jack’s legacy may about to be, in the near future, even more incredible. A weakened Liberal Party merging with the NDP would not see the Liberals coming out on top, the New Democrats would lead. Canada’s “natural governing party” forced to merge with the left to survive, because of Jack. Now, imagine that legacy.

Or, “The Real Reason We Left T.O.”.

When it comes up in conversation, Maria and I never shy again from a good Rob Ford joke. We tell people that he’s the real reason why we left Toronto, and some of the time, it feels very much like the truth.

Although they said it couldn’t be done, although they said he’d need the support of council—which he’d never get—and the support of the people of Toronto—which he’d never have enough of—he’s doing it. Rob Ford is nearly single-handedly dismantling the City of Toronto.

He’s blown through the city’s surpluses created by Mayor Miller, he’s repealed taxes and fees which are going to have to be replaced with funding cuts, he’s declared war on the city’s social services and programming, and he’s flipping the bird not just to cyclists and pedestrians, but to motorists too. What’s more, Doug Ford, the mayor’s equally erudite brother, claims to have never heard of Margaret Atwood, one of this country’s most celebrated authors, after she spoke out against Ford’s earlier comments about closing Toronto libraries. That is, Doug Ford thinks that since there are more libraries than Tim Horton’s stores in his Etobicoke neighbourhood, some of those libraries have got to go.

What the Fords are doing to Toronto is not surprising, I don’t think, to anyone. If anything what’s surprising is how easily they’re getting it all done. With the Fords in charge, politics in Toronto feels more like schoolyard wheeling-and-dealing than it does governance of the country’s most populated city.

But,  if anything, Rob Ford’s alleged middle finger salute and his brothers comments about Margaret Atwood aren’t atypical but are becoming the norm. That’s because politics in Toronto, and elsewhere, are seeing the rise of a new kind of anti-intellectualism. A second coming of the Dark Ages.

Read the rest of this article »

I like that our election cycles are short; the actual campaigning doesn’t last very long. Sometimes, however, it just feels too short and I imagine on Tuesday morning, the day after the election, all this machinery that’s been built up around the election, all the political parties, the journalists, and us interested bloggers will find ourselves returning to our ordinary routines rather begrudgingly. Still, there’s time for one last kick at the can before Monday night, so here goes.

Read the rest of this article »

I’ve been mulling it over and have decided that the difference is strong leadership.

There’s no question that Conservative leader Stephen Harper is a strong leader. Under Harper the powers of the Prime Minister—already alarmingly broad and sweeping—have become more concentrated than ever. Harper rules his party caucus, his party, and indeed his country with a very tight fist. During the English Leader’s Debate Liberal leader Michael Ignatieff remarked, several times, that Harper “shuts down anything he can’t control.” To be honest, I don’t think Harper would disagree.

Mr. Ignatieff’s case, however, is a classic example of poor, weak leadership.

Ignatieff is a Harvard professor. He’s an academic, a writer, a journalist, a human rights activist, and he’s very well respected around the world. In Britain he’s widely referred to as “the thinking woman’s tea crumpet” which is apparently some kind of veiled compliment alluding to the fact that he’s smart and handsome. Regardless, he’s a bright guy with a good grasp of how our parliamentary system works and boat loads of respect and integrity. But he’s a weak leader.

Read the rest of this article »

I feel like I’m a pretty connected guy. Especially during this election, I’m following things pretty closely. Twitter, which has become hugely important this time around, is an provides an endless stream of information. But how much of what’s going down during this campaign is the Canadian public actually paying attention to, and what does it take to begin to sway their opinions, and their votes?

I wonder, because I feel like the Conservative Party have come into this campaign hurting. They’ve made some fairly serious missteps. They’re constantly falling on their faces. And, according to the latest polls and numbers, no one really seems to have noticed. Instead, as far as I can tell, the Liberals and Conservatives—the two front-runners to form the next government—seem to be at relatively the same percentage of popularity as they were going into this election campaign.

What am I missing?

Read the rest of this article »