The Proletariat Congress

In a move to further degrade their popularity, the Liberals have gone to bed with the Conservatives and proposed a piece of legislation that would violate the fundamental clauses of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. This legislation, Bill C-416 would allow for warrant-free wire-tapping. This bill is a reincarnation of Bill C-74 that died during the last session because it didn’t make it to a first reading.

The purpose of this Act is to ensure that telecommunications service providers have the capability to enable national security and law enforcement agencies to exercise their authority to intercept communications, and to require service providers to provide subscriber and other information, without unreasonably impairing the privacy of individuals, the provision of telecommunications services to Canadians or the competitiveness of the Canadian telecommunications industry.

That is just the basic description. A rather broad sweeping pre-amble. It is written in political jargon so we, the voting public can’t see through the guise that the deceptive federal politicians have put up in a bid to remain ‘relevant’. They are still cozying up to the lame-duck American Administration whose core undoing was the unconstitutional wire-tapping that was given as an executive order and found by the Supreme Court to be in violation of the fundamental rights of the American public.

The Canadian government didn’t learn from this folly and has decided to make a benign polyamorous relationship with a nation who continues to preach democracy with one voice but in the next seeks to make a resonating assault on fundamental rights.

Under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, clause eight states:

Everyone has the right to be secure against unreasonable search or seizure.

If Bill C-416 was passed, it would violation clause eight because any search and seizure requires either line of sight or a warrant, or for you to fail a customs screening or you’ve been pulled over and you’ve given the officer permission to check your vehicle… But to wire-tap, it would be a violation unless a warrant was acquired.

The Bush Administration and Alberto ‘Memo, what memo’ Gonzales authorised such actions, which has proven to back fire on them. What makes the Canadian government think it can do the same thing?

Perhaps the fact that they have no regard for the Canadian public and play us for naïve children who need to be led by the hand into a future where we live in an Orwellian-style Nanny State where the government is deluded into thinking it knows what’s best.

Fortunately for the public, the Charter provides a nice little clause that allows for us to seek legal recourse against those who are mentally unable to comprehend that the War on Terror is nothing more than hot air that is designed as a money sink hole for tax-payer dollars and will achieve nothing and will be a greater pork hog than the Sponsorship Programme. Only instead of lining the pockets of French Liberals, we’d be sinking money into “security”measures that leave us no more secure than we were before 9/11. All we get now are longer lines, fees and all the headaches and hassles you can handle!

Anyone whose rights or freedoms, as guaranteed by this Charter, have been infringed or denied may apply to a court of competent jurisdiction to obtain such remedy as the court considers appropriate and just in the circumstances.

And that lovely clause? That’s clause 24(1) from the Charter. It has been used in the fight to legalise homosexual marriages and for other legal rights that were otherwise denied because of enshrined chauvinistic; Victorian practices sanctioned by the government.

Until the Canadian public wakes up, we’re going to be caught in a cycle that seeks Conservative and Liberal government, neither of which truly reflect the social and equality needs of the Canadian public. They are only fringe political groups who specialise in expensive mudslinging and bullying.

Accountability means being accountable for the actions, or inactions that you have either done, or have failed to.

When you’re a leader, it means ensuring that there is a consistent level of integrity and that your followers are accountable for their actions. They have made the choice, and you the leader must ensure that they are accountable for what they have decided to do.

Unfortunately, this is not the case in Canadian politics.

The only people that must be held accountable are those who cross the floor to join the Liberals, but not the ones who join the Conservatives.

Politicians like Belinda Stronach and Scott Brison who both were previously Conservatives, having turned Liberal were called to account for their actions; for them to face their constituents. They had to explain their actions; they had to face the media circus and a barrage of questions in Parliament regarding their actions.

They survived re-election as Liberals.

There are two new turncoats who have crossed the floor after the most recent election who have not be held accountable because the Conservatives fail to understand that accountability applies at both ends of the spectrum.

The two MPs in question are David Emerson of Vancouver Kingsway riding. He crossed the floor immediately after re-election as a Liberal. It’s common knowledge in Canada that Vancouver is not a Conservative stronghold, which is known for its liberal attitude towards Marijuana and is home to people like Marc Emery, who heads the BC Marijuana Party, and is a haven for vegetarians and vegans alike.

There had been numerous calls for a byelection, in which Emerson would stand as a Conservative beside a new Liberal candidate, but that didn’t happen. So much for that promise of accountability, eh, Prime Minister Harper?

Or, what of Wajid Khan of Mississauga-Streetsville riding? Has he been called upon to be held accountable? There have been calls, but newly elected Liberal leader Stéphane Dion has decided to shrug it off. The loss didn’t appear to bother him, as he has been quoted by the media as believing that Khan was always a Conservative at heart.

As for Wajid Khan, the GTA MP who turned Conservative a week ago and hosted Prime Minister Stephen Harper in his Mississauga-Streetsville riding yesterday, Dion said that loss was inevitable, too. “Mr. Khan, was in fact a Conservative … I don’t feel like I lost a Liberal.”

The only Liberal MP that didn’t cross the floor that Dion is writing off as a no big loss is Jean Lapierre who has tendered a letter of resignation, indicating that he plans to give up his seat in the next federal election, whenever that may be. Though, it might be sooner than later as the Conservatives are running low on borrowed time.

Dion shrugs off lost MPs

Interestingly, while the Conservatives have declined to comment in relation to accountability in the case of the two turncoat MPs that jumped off the Liberal bandwagon to board the political death-trap that is the Conservative bandwagon, they would have had no qualms with rabble rousing if the case had been that a Conservative MP had opted to join the Liberals.

Or, why there have been a series of patronage appointments, which were supposedly an element of the Liberal era, where entitlement was the trump card.

One of such appointments was commissioned by Harper, a proud advocate of his much touted ‘Accountability Act’. This promise was the centre-point of his election campaign, something that was posted in all of his television ads; something repeated throughout the debates… ad nauseum.

An important component of this act was the establishment of an appointment commission, that would oversee appointments, and ensure transparency in the process. Unfortunately, it seems that the Conservatives are skirting around this to get in their own people…

That’s not to say it has gone unnoticed. In fact, there is quite the vocal opposition to it, as it flagrantly violates the Accountability Act.

After the rejection, Harper said the idea of an appointments commission was essentially dead. However, the commission exists under the accountability act and opposition MPs want to know why appointments are being made when positions on the commission itself – which is designed to make the appointments system more transparent – haven’t been filled.

Government officials say it’s unfair to expect the commission would be running so soon after the accountability act was passed. The Tories have made 118 appointments in the past several months, and critics say many are clearly patronage appointments. The Liberal governments of Jean Chrétien and Paul Martin were often criticized for doing the same.

Unfair to expect immediate accountability? No, it’s unfair to think that the Canadian public is so gullible that we don’t see through this bald-faced façade of Conservative-sanctions corruption.

The only amusing element of this ordeal is the elegant mudslinging that keeps the government ticking.

Liberal MP Mark Holland (Ajax-Pickering) said the point is the Tories have painted themselves as “holier than any government that has ever come before them and are beyond reproach. It’s the hypocrisy of it all … because they have gone and made patronage appointment after patronage appointment, which is completely opposite of the image they are trying to portray.”

Tory MP Pierre Poilievre (Nepean-Carleton), parliamentary secretary to Treasury Board President Vic Toews, said the Liberals have no “authority to lecture” the Tories, adding “they engaged in a Roman orgy of patronage during the 13 years of Chrétien and Martin and then went on to try and block the very creation of this public appointments commission.”

Bolded are the parts I found to immensely tickle my funny bone.

Tories criticized for host of patronage appointments

In all of this, I find it most intriguing that the only parties not to lose people to other political parties are the NDP and the Bloc Quebec…

This isn’t to say that they aren’t disgusted with the whole lack of accountability on the part of the Conservatives.

When it comes to the lives of other humans, there is always a group of people ready to criticise the actions of the person or persons who made the decision, without having walked a mile in that person’s shoes. The people who oppose the actions of another are often those who will preach the mantra of “do as I say and not as I do.” These people tend to fall in the religious sector of humanity and never think beyond their little mentality of “it offends God” or that they know other disabled children who turned out fine. Not all those who are disabled are disabled in the same way. Some are only partially disabled physically and have strong mental capabilities. Or, they are people like Terri Schiavo who were once fully functional both physically and mentally but wound up in a persistent vegetative state, a condition, like that of the young girl, Ashley, which is incurable.
In this case, I am talking about the fate of a young girl, who was born without motor and cognitive capabilities beyond that of an infant of three months old. She can’t hold a toy and derives nothing but a simple pleasure out of life and cannot express her opinion or feelings beyond the basic level that is easily accessible to any infant of three months.

Mean-spirited people who have never walked a mile in the parents’ shoes are passing harsh judgement, decrying the decision to try and give the girl the most comfort she can receive out of life. Instead of trying to demonstrate understanding and compassion, these people are talking about how this girl will never experience life, and how she’s being denied her human rights.

But, according to the doctors over seeing the case of the little girl, she is beyond the reach of medical science. She can be kept comfortable, but her situation cannot be rectified with a simple pill that can repair the severely damaged neurological tissue in the brain.

Now, I shall bring those of you up to speed who haven’t the faintest notion as to why I’m writing this.

In America, in Seattle, there is a couple who have a beyond severely disabled daughter by the name of Ashley. She has the cognitive capacity of an infant, she cannot move as she lacks motor skills and her parents are concerned about her future when they won’t be around to care for her. She was diagnosed by doctors as having “static encephalopathy of unknown etiology”.

The “Ashley Treatment” – the blog her parents have set up to explain their situation to the world and offer support to other parents facing immensely difficult decisions about their own children with very similar disabilities that prevent the child from being able to live a full and healthy life.

The parents made the decision to medically inhibit puberty in their daughter by having her uterus removed via hysterectomy, the breast buds removed and growth attenuation through high-dose oestrogen therapy.

According to the blog set up by the parents, who have chosen to not disclose their names, despite being brave enough to speak publicly about their child’s plight, the main reason, contrary to the damning and scathing public opinions, was to minimise the discomfort that their daughter would experience from bedsores as a result of increased size and weight. Also reduced her discomfort by removing the uterus so she wouldn’t menstruate, and hence, be able to have children. Also taken into account was that there are potentially abusive caregivers in the world, and the girl might have been sexually assaulted at the hands of a caregiver and have a child of her own, whom she would not be able to care for.

Unlike what most people thought, the decision to pursue the “Ashley Treatment” was not a difficult one. Ashley will be a lot more physically comfortable free of menstrual cramps, free of the discomfort associated with large and fully-developed breasts, and with a smaller, lighter body that is better suited to constant lying down and is easier to be moved around.

Ashley’s parents said the decision to remove their daughter’s uterus and breast buds was for the girl’s comfort and safety.

“Ashley has no need for her uterus since she will not be bearing children,” they said, adding that the decision means she will not experience the menstrual cycle and the bleeding and discomfort commonly associated with it.

The operation also removed the possibility of pregnancy if Ashley were ever the victim of sexual abuse, they said.

The removal of the girl’s breast buds was also done in part to avoid sexual abuse, but was carried out primarily so she would not experience discomfort when lying down, the parents said.

The couple emphasised their love for their daughter and said the amount of criticism their choice of treatment attracted had surprised them.

This sounds to me like they would rather her daughter be comfortable, forever frozen, trapped in the body of a child. This doesn’t seem like the parents are seeking to make their lives more convenient. If they were, there are far less expensive options that the surgery and hormone therapy they are getting for their daughter.

The parents are genuinely concerned and made their decisions based on their daughter’s inability to communicate.

BBC: Have Your Say – How ethical is Ashley’s treatment?

Though, there are people on the internet who have expressed their lack of understanding and compassion through various mediums, including the BBC’s popular “Have your say” area.

People against the parents’ decision

I think it’s terrible. Just because someone is unable to communicate doesn’t mean they don’t have any rights as human beings. Look at Terri Schaivo. She was not cared for by her husband because it was inconvenient for him and his new, healthy bride-to-be. Ashley is being physically altered by her parents because it would be inconvenient if she grew. The handicapped are NOT inconvenient, nor are they disposable! I’m just sorry that our world is so sanitized that we’ve lost sight of the fact that life is messy and sometimes terribly inconvenient. I’m most sorry this poor sweet child couldn’t have her opinion heard in this situation.

Heather McIntyre, Cincinnati, Ohio USA

———

This is a bizarre case, and it disgusts me.

Oalv, Oslo

———

these people are sick
cutting out their daughter’s uterus and cutting off her breasts
who the hell do they think they are??

[mango-], Cardiff, Wales

People who supported the parents’ decision

Why do people feel the need to slate the parents of this unfortunate young girl and undoubtedly add more pressure than is already upon them? Whether you agree with the treatment or not is completely irrelevant as you will not have to care for this girl. Has the only thing the internet provided is an anonymous hiding place for opinionated people to rant about things that they are not experienced or educated enough to comment on. Let people conduct their lives as they wish, put yourself in the shoes of the parents and the young girl and I think you will see that parents/family generally know best

Mark, Dresden, Germany

———

As a parent of a severely disabled boy of nine years old, my heart goes out to Ashley’s parents. To the many critics I ask: when did you ever offer to aid someone with a kid like this or even offer to change one single nappy? Our ‘extended family’ dumped us. Governmental support was assumed – after all, don’t we live in a Welfare State, don’t we? – but unavailable. Our others kids are treated as pariahs. Saddest time each year is local Special (disabled) School ‘Awards Night’ where we meet parents of 65 severely retarded kiddies. In shocking contrast with their happy smiling kids, I see 65 pairs of lives destroyed. Dull, sleep-deprived eyes, zombie-like stares, shattered & futureless.

steve godfrey

———

At least Ashley is blessed with parents who truly love her and have made a hard (but right decision is my view) to give her as best a quality of life that is medically possible. Her HUMAN RIGHTS are safe in thier hands.

Malcolm, London

———

A person who is mentally a 3-month-old will not ever need breasts, ovaries, uterus, or adult size. Does keeping her small make her less human? Tell that to people with dwarfism. Does removing female parts make her less female? Tell that to cancer patients. What does a 3-month-old need? To be held, cleaned, fed, kept from harm, and paid attention to. This surgery will aid all her caregivers in giving her these things. Also, it is human nature to more tenderly care for children than adults. The parents gave their daughter a unique gift — permanent physical childhood — to help her get what she needs. If medicine advances enough to fix her brain, the other stuff will be easy to fix.

dmm, Washington, DC

———

Before any of us has the right to comment on the parents decision, we should try living a day in their shoes. Looking after a disabled child is hard enough without having other critise your actions without knowning the full story.

Debby Cooper, Surrey

———

Having worked with children and adults in a physical condition similar to Ashley’s, the decision her parents have made seems wise to me. Many parents want to be able to keep them at home, but as these kids grow, the parents’ desire is one thing and the reality of lifting and carrying an adult is another. The surgeries to which she was submitted are not drastic surgeries; they heal quickly. I see no mistreatment nor wrong motives here, but rather loving parents who are thinking of how to make a difficult future easier for the little girl and for her family as well. May God bless them and help them in this.

Susan Combs, Bogotá, Colombia

For the few callous comments I found, there were more thoughtful, supportive ones ones dotting the horizon. Comments from people who had an ounce of good old fashion common sense in their hearts, or from people who knew the parents’ pain.

So, what do I have to say about all of this? It’s the parents’ choice. They consulted doctors and specialists. They had to make a choice. They are the ones who care for this child, not the people who frown upon the actions that the parents have taken. And, so, I say, no one but the doctors and parents should have a decision in this.

Too bad conservatives are too willing to block stem cell research because of the moral and ethical dilemma that supposed surrounds using embryonic cells to learn more about how to reverse chronic illnesses that a hundred years ago we thought we could treat with a little bit of morphine and three days in bed. (Hybrid embryo work ‘under threat’)

Treatment keeps girl child-sized

Note: All the italic quotes are either taken from the BBC’s article, or from the blog set up by the parents.

If you wish to send an email to the parents offering them your support, or if you wish to share your own stories, so they know they are not alone in their struggle, you can reach them at: PillowAngel@hotmail.com