• You will need to login or register before you can post a message. If you already have an Agriville account login by clicking the login icon on the top right corner of the page. If you are a new user you will need to Register.

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Is there a STUPIDER columnist in Canada?

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Is there a STUPIDER columnist in Canada?

    This in the Edmonton Sun

    You need to read it twice in order to really appreciate the enormity of the stupidity here,

    Bill C-39 is a Bill to Reform the Canada Grain Act, not the CWB Act.

    The Board of Directors canned Dear Deanna, not the PM.

    But why let relevant fact get in the way of a good ol fashioned smear job.

    Infact he even admits he knows nothing about the issue, amazing


    PM makes 'em gag

    Harperites muzzle opposition beyond Parliament Hill

    By GREG WESTON
    greg.weston@sunmedia.ca


    Over at super-Steve's fun emporium, the prime minister and his advisers are merrily passing their days playing whack-a-critic, offing heads of federal agencies who dare to doubt The Conservative Way.

    It started just after the last election -- first it was out with the pinko-commie law reformers, then the nagging women's advocates, escalating in recent weeks to the federal nuclear regulator and the entire office of the national science adviser.

    Meanwhile, over at the Canadian Wheat Board, it seems, any day is a beautiful day for an execution.

    First, the Harperites mowed down board president Adrian Measner, a 34-year-veteran of the board.

    Last week, the Conservative plow got the board's VP of communications, Deanna Allen, the agency's official spokesperson and frequent public face.




    The sin of both execs, apparently, was not championing the Harper government's proposed legislation to end the wheat board's monopoly on grain marketing -- so-called Bill C-39 -- a move that the farmers' union and other critics claim would effectively kill the agency altogether.

    We don't pretend to understand all the minutia of the great grain debate, but even we can comprehend Measner's concern expressed at the time of his firing: "If you aren't free to speak out, what kind of country do we have?"

    Predictably, Harper's speak-no-evil style of governance is beginning to leach beyond the federal executive suites into the working bureaucracy.

    A recent memo from the Canadian Grain Commission's director of human resources to rank-and-file public servants, for instance, sent a clear message: In Stephen Harper's wonderful world of open and accountable government, having an independent mind and mouth risks not having a job.

    Seems one of the major federal public service unions has been encouraging its members at the commission to write to their MPs, opposing Bill C-39 killing federal control of grain sales.

    A subsequent e-mail from management, approved at the highest levels of the Harper administration, warned in part: "You are free to convey your views to your Member of Parliament, so long as you do not criticize the Government of Canada, or otherwise bring into question your ability to perform your employment duties."

    Translation: As long as you agree with Harper, by all means write and tell your MP. Otherwise, best not leave your office as a return address on the letter.

    The muzzle doesn't stop there.

    Even letters to the editor that may be critical of The Conservative Truth are apparently out.

    "If you identify yourself as a Canadian Grain Commission employee in a letter to the editor that criticizes government policy relating to (the commission), you could create a perception that your views of government policy are not impartial, and that you may not be able to follow or apply government policy in an impartial manner."

    Translation: By all means write to the paper, and be sure to check the want ads for your next job opportunity.

    ON THE WEB

    Finally, for those who think the Internet is the ultimate forum for free speech, here is the Harper government's official position on that subject.

    "We would like to remind you that inappropriate behaviour by employees on websites, blogs and public fora (newspapers and meetings, etc.) could result in administrative and/or disciplinary action.

    "We encourage you to consult your manager should you need further clarification and guidance."

    Translation: Criticize the Harper government's wheat policy, and you're toast.

    #2
    This Weston pen probably doesn't know the difference between:

    ...the Board and the Minister


    ....Prime Minister and the Anglican Minister

    .....knowing the issues and making them up

    Parsley

    Comment


      #3
      We don't pretend to understand all the minutia of the great grain debate, but even we can comprehend Measner's concern expressed at the time of his firing: "If you aren't free to speak out, what kind of country do we have?"

      And if you say you want farmers to decide and then hold a vote and the farmers say one thing but the government agency ignores that, lies about process and then proceeds on down it's own path, what kind of country do we have.

      Comment


        #4
        I know, I know I shouldn't be too ctitical of poor Mr. Weston,

        after all he does have to write all those opinion pieces and that must take an awful long time, he clearly needs to be efficient with that time and like any good efficient manager you gotta cut the extras, the luxuries if you will,

        So like any good opinion writer, Weston feels that FACTS are an expendable luxury.

        Of what possible use are facts when all you're doing is offering you're opinion on the subject.

        Comment


          #5
          The truth shall set you free...and Greg Weston is a pretty fair reporter for "The Sun" which has supported Harper in the past. They probably couldn't stand being trampled by the government anymore and just had to spill some beans on them.

          Will have to go to "The Sun" site and download the article.

          Comment


            #6
            It doesn't matter if he supported Chuck Guite in the past. his facts are amuck.

            You can not be recognized as a credible opinion maker if you cannot differentiate between a fact and a made-up purple whomper.

            How hard is it for Weston to call one of the Board of Directors or Chairman Ritter , listed on the CWB website, and ask they if they dismissed an employee. After all, the CWB is an Act of Parliament.

            The Board, not Harper dismissed Allan.

            And why don't the choice Directors issue a press release "clarifying " the dismissal?

            What exactly do they do? Besides wantying to re-study the new program they had just approved?

            Farmers don't need to pay for this crap.


            Parsley

            Comment


              #7
              Willy, Ritter acknowledges that it was a board decision.

              For all we know she was having nooky with the mailboy in her office, maybe she was rude to the kitchen staff, maybe she called Vader a moron, who knows.

              But we'll excuse you for not knowing the facts,

              but Weston as a profesional opinion writer (that's different than a reporter) should have at least a passing interest in the relevant facts.

              Comment


                #8
                Weston makes two points he should have to eat for breakfast tommorow morning:

                First, he hums this looney toon:

                He claims that "The sin , was not championing the Harper government's proposed legislation"

                huh?
                How does Weston know this?

                The B of D are hardly going to say why she was fired, and the single deskers are hardly going to support firing her for what Weston claims she did. They'd give her a bloody bonus.

                And then he binds one fired employee to another:  

                " we can comprehend Measner's concern expressed at the time of his firing"

                Good grief. They've been fired. And he;s treatign them as victims.

                Maybe the farmers are the victims, here. Maybe we've been too longpaying the salaries of people who deserved to have been fired.

                Parsley

                Comment


                  #9
                  For all you tender folk out there,

                  my "nooky" reference was not to be taken seriously, only an illustration of a possible serious offence that would cause a firing.

                  I don't actually think that occured.

                  Although things are bad in the world of free speech when you feel you have to defend humour that is a bit on the raw side.

                  Comment


                    #10
                    AdamSmith,

                    If there is anything this would teach us... the CGC Act changes are politically insensitive... misunderstood... and could have a large political cost to the Conservatives.

                    CGC Producer Security Changes without a cost effective alernative... that is generally avaliable... must be in place for these amendments to be acceptable for the majority of grain growers in western Canada.

                    The connection between the CGC, CWB and Minister Ritz is logical. The CWB giving Minister Ritz the slip on Allen... is par for the political games played in Ottawa... the CWB BOD played a crafty game... and won!

                    Comment


                      #11
                      I would like too nominate Larry Kursh from the Winnipeg free press. See any of his CWB articals very "fair"

                      Comment


                        #12
                        Tom,

                        "the CGC Act changes are politically insensitive"


                        It would seem. But things are not always what they seem. IMHO.

                        Sometimes, actions,...whether they be unjust actions, unkind actions, veering from the status quo actions,... are done to provoke a specific reaction. Any change to CGC is going to cause a reaction.

                        If you know the group/person well, you can almost predict that reaction. The Government is very familiar with the CGC/CWB, as you say,Tom

                        The actions undertaken with a good heart, knowing what the reaction,(sometimes negative, and emotional from farmers), and what the end result will be,(A better situation for the farmers, CAN BENEFIT.

                        Often, the end result will ultimatley benefit, ONLY the recipient, and not the giver. In fact, the recipient is often oblivious to what was planned to happen.

                        How do you sometimes get a desired end result?

                        Make it appear as if it was a spontaneous,disjointed, emotional- happening, devoid of reason.

                        The giver, as in this case, the Feds, will pay the price.

                        Parsley

                        Comment


                          #13
                          When a columnist spends more than a dime out of his own pocket to risk growing a crop and sit and wait as hail, frost, drought, hail, floods or insects decimate his/her crop I might consider his/her opinion. Until then maybe I/we as farmers should decide on the future of his/her wages. Until then stfu.
                          Sory for the rant, but I get so sick of peolple outside of the "ag" industry giving their so called opinions.

                          Comment

                          • Reply to this Thread
                          • Return to Topic List
                          Working...