CLICK HERE FOR THE 2022 NEWSLETTER
Tuesday, December 13, 2022
Sunday, November 27, 2022
My recent book - an excerpt - On Canadian Governance
Contemplating
Governance
Some
defining propositions.
Partisanship should never be taken to the point of detriment to
our country, our way of life or our solidarity.
There is nothing that
generosity is unable to cure.
We need to support people on their way to the middle class and
beyond.
The
very best social program is a vibrant economy.
People deserve a clear
statement of intent from the government, and to know if that intent is being
exercised as communicated, rather than being fed spin.
It is time to redefine
PROGRESSIVE to include enterprise AND an open market,
progressive values in concert with a vibrant market economy is humanity’s
greatest opportunity.
We need to increase the
volume and velocity of information flowing to our young people so they can
close the applied science gap.
People have a charter right
to CHOOSE, choice in how they manage their lives and their family’s lives,
choice in how they worship, choice in how and what their children learn, choice
in how to manage their health and choice in their life cadence.
In Canada, people speak of the
two solitudes, solitudes that have evolved out of English and French influences.
There really are many “solitudes”,
Canada has unmatched natural
beauty and biodiversity; it needs to be protected. Canada can be a world leader
in building a clean economy. Goals related to a clean economy and environmental
protection can occur in concert with a vibrant economy that includes,
resource extraction and responsible fossil fuel use.
Regulatory processes in
The world has become increasingly precarious, and the only thing that can be done is to assess risks and prepare.
Canada is a wealthy country, yet we are unprepared. We need to move
aggressively to prepare by hardening our institutions and infrastructure and
properly preparing our population and then drawing on the
population’s various skill sets. This is particularly true for our military and
civil defence capabilities – we need deterrence, public health, and disaster
preparedness.
Institutions in Canada have
become ineffective in many
CLICK HERE TO PURCHASE THE BOOK
Purpose
As a keen observer of government, I’ve spent a lot of time and effort
studying governance, policy, and economics to understand how to be effective at
governing. When an issue arises, I think the issue through and then design a
policy response contextualized to my understanding of the law, specifically the
Charter of Rights and Freedoms and other related factors. My process is free
from political partisanship or reflection on affected interest groups. I simply
want the best governance solution for a given jurisdiction. This gives a
pristine view of what is optimal, a clean unfettered solution.
I then observe the government as it addresses the same issue. I watch as
the political process (partisanship) distorts the issue first, then the
solution. I watch special interest groups distort the issue to move policy away
from the “best policy” for the whole, to a policy that serves their interests.
More often than not, I witness policy that is far less than optimal and fails
to meet its objectives.
There is a reality inherent in our modality of governance, that reality
is certain cohorts in society can lobby the government more effectively than
others. This reality effects a number of ills such as regulatory capture,
entrenches and exacerbates inequities, misdirects government resources, effects
institutional stagnation, or worse, institutional decadence, obstructs and
distorts market function, retards national (jurisdictional) productivity and
retards the absorptive capacity of governments and society at large.
Accountability is the most critical element in the operation of any
organization. In business, the accountability loop is clear – there is a given
business activity, there are a set of metrics and indicators – there is an
accounting process and controls. These are monitored over appropriate time
frames and provided to the executive in a timely manner to drive the
decision-making process. What is in place in our governments lacks this crisp
accountability function, and what is in place is totally ineffective. More
importantly, however, is that absent crisp reporting, the political process
perpetuates flawed policy.
As I observe government action “short-termism” raises its head in almost
every area of endeavour that the government undertakes. It is the case that the
solution horizon to any given governance challenge far exceeds the election
cycle. This reality, in concert with the desire for differentiation between the
various “governing” political parties, results in governments pursuing quick
solutions so they can take credit within a given election cycle or an incoming
government simply resending legislation for political purposes. Further,
short-termism frustrates preparedness, there is very little pork barrel
opportunity in being prepared for disasters, properly informing, and educating
the populace or building an effective national defence program – they are all
extremely important, however. There is no area of governance more negatively
affected by short-termism than foreign policy. Canada, and the west generally,
have failed to take a concerted and long-term track on foreign relations and we
are paying a massive price in life and treasure for our tardiness and
fickleness.
The core values of society must come to expression in a clear and
concise narrative. The narrative feeds the creed of a nation and builds the
culture of a people. Shaping that narrative is critical to the stability of a
nation. The narrative must stand the test of time and it must resonate with the
population. Most importantly, it must serve the nation. Canada’s narrative, and
the West's generally, is fragmented. It has been run through a shredder
consisting of polarizing political discourse, thought silos facilitated by new
technologies, foreign actors with deviant intent and the emergence of cancel
culture.
There is no clear distinction, I believe, between the government and the
economy. The economy is the substrate of governance and governance can enhance
or destroy the economy. Optimizing the harmonics between the two is a delicate
process. Governance is essentially an exercise in behavioural economics. Many
in government lack an understanding of relevant economic imperatives, while
others see the economy as antithetical to a good society. No matter where you
are in the world, under what type of government – supply and demand are in
play, supply and demand and the full basket of economic laws are as real as
gravity.
One points out all these challenges and the reader is likely to be of
the impression that the author is anti-government or sees scant opportunity for
the government to improve. The crux of governance is that good policy does good
things and bad policy does bad things. As problematic as effecting good
governance is, in Canada and many of our western counterparts, we are sitting
at the pinnacle of human existence. What has gotten us here is a market economy
and social activism that finds expression in government policy. It is odd to
consider that society at large does not fully appreciate how miraculous the
market and democracy are, the importance of the rule of law as it relates to
human rights, and how fragile it all is. The forces of entropy are omnipresent
and lurking to challenge order every second of every day. Therefore, it is
critical that these forces are brought into resolution so they can be
effectively confronted.
I quake at the prospect that our generation’s failure to maintain the world order handed to us by the great generation. I quake when I see governance heading down a warn path of error, absent an aft glance at history where the answers reside. I quake at the prospect that we’ll meet with a violent world due to government’s indifference to critical issues like the cause of freedom and the cause of peace. If we continue to error, as we are doing in many ways, the people making the errors, people who have lived through peace and prosperity never experienced before in human history – will leave in our wake a place of deprivation for our grandchildren, or worse, our grandchildren will find themselves with a rifle in their hands. I put pen to paper in this book to perhaps effect a ripple in a pond that might grow a wave of influence, moving us to a place of good and reason and peace and prosperity.
Sunday, June 12, 2022
The slippery slope - my friends in the United States, say no to gun control
The slippery slope - my friends in the United States, say no to gun control
In my country, Canada, over the past couple of decades I have been
witnessing an attack on civil rights - freedoms hard-won and long-held in
western democracies. The one thing that has shored my will in the promotion of
liberty has been knowing that just below us was the United States
– the bastion of enlightenment values as expressed in the
constitution of your country. It grieves me to watch, as the narrative that
carried the United States to lead the western world to prosperity and to be
more peaceful, is being fractured; this is happening to the extent that the
stability you’ve given the world is in jeopardy. Civilizations end because they
give up on their core values and the will to defend them. I shudder at the
thought of what has been and can still be, the beacon of liberty for the world,
being lost to us all.
In the
800 years since the Magna Carta came to be, there has been a bid to emancipate
the people, to allow the autonomous individual to come into existence and let a
thousand flowers bloom – this bid has been aptly dubbed the cause of freedom.
As with all movements, the pursuit of the movement’s end goal ebbs and flows.
As an observer of the United States, and a most appreciative neighbour, I see
the cause of freedom ebbing. On the occasions where the cause of freedom has
ebbed in the past, it has been done a little at a time – one concession at a
time, until one night you’re awakened to the sound of hob-nailed boots on your
front stairs. The population is always horrified when it happens as the lead-up
is a slow and insidious series of concessions, and then there is a tipping
point, and a tyrant has the reins.
The
founders of the United States were students of history. They understood what
happened when absolute power landed in the hands of a few. Therefore, they
designed a modality of governance to prevent that very thing from happening –
competing arms of government, and competing centers of power. This was done
with an eye to having the government answerable to the people. They knew
something else, it is a cruel truth, but a truth to be reckoned with, that truth being, if people can steal
power from a legitimate government they will and
then there are only people to attend to their own defence and the
preservation and restoration of liberty. They knew another cruel truth,
sometimes words fail, and force becomes necessary and when that day comes you
want more than a rock in your hand.
In
Canada, I have written letters to the government attempting to share the wisdom
of your founding fathers with people of influence,
but my words have fallen on deaf ears. When I was 14 years old, I
walked into the McCleod’s hardware store with $135 I earned working on a ranch, I purchased a 30-30 rifle and two
boxes of ammunition and walked down the main street of Vernon BC to my father’s
office to get a ride home – no one was endangered by me doing that. As time
progressed the government began gun control measures. This started with us
having to register our guns and get a license to possess firearms after having
a background check. Now, the government has decided to take away certain
classes of firearms, and now again, the government has banned handguns. The
millions of lawful gun owners who are having their right to own firearms taken
away, one step at a time, have done nothing wrong
– they have been vetted for criminality. The facts and figures I
have accumulated on this subject are outside the scope of this document.
However, I can tell you there is no justification in the context of public
safety for these measures. I want to warn my friends in the United States, that
gun control initiatives, while wrapped up in public safety offer no advancement
in public safety and they will end with your right to keep and bear arms taken
away.
When
they tell you that the state will look after your security of person, remind
them that no matter how committed a police officer is, they can only drive a
car so fast and that most acts of violence occur in an instance.
When they scoff at you saying you want the right to protect the hard-earned
freedoms that are the legacy of millions who gave their lives in the cause of
freedom, by discounting the fact that a collection of individuals with small
arms can subdue a misdirected modern army, you’ll have one word for them –
Afghanistan. When they tell you that the founding fathers really wanted
firearms in the hands of government-controlled entities, tell them to look at
history. There are a lot of forces at work eroding all that is the United States.
Please never give up on your constitution, where it goes
the cause of freedom goes.
Friday, June 3, 2022
William Sterling Blair PC COM MP President of the Privy Council - GUN CONTROL
June 3, 2022
Neil E. Thomson
825 Alview Crescent
Kamloops, BC
V2C 65C
Email: nthomson20@gmail.com
William Sterling Blair PC COM MP
President of the Privy Council
2263 Kingston Road
Scarborough, Ontario
M1N 1T8
Email: Bill.Blair@parl.gc.ca
Dear Mr. Blair,
RE: The recent bout
of gun control
This
is letter is directed to you as President of the Privy Council.
I can demonstrate
clearly that there is no justification for the two most recent government gun
control initiatives. When the issue is contextualized to societal risks
generally, a person legally owning a firearm of any kind fails to make muster
as a justification for a governmental intrusion on the right to own a firearm.
While there are no expressed rights to owning firearms in Canadian law, there
is a fulsome body of law in relation to property rights. There is also a
long-standing cultural and (British / Canadian) legal tradition dating back 400
years in support of citizen ownership of firearms. Further, and more
importantly, Section 7 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms is excited in
relation to this matter, both under the rubric of liberty generally and
security of person. Further again, Section 15 of the Charter of Rights and
Freedoms is excited, as these government actions unjustifiably discriminates
against an unenumerated class of people. I can assure you and your
colleagues there will be court challenges in relation to this reality.
Click Here: Emergencies Measures Act Charter Right Concerns
We are at a critical juncture in Canada, the confluence of factors has emerged: post-Covid realities, the fragmentation of our national narrative and societal fissures that have emerged from these events, the “real” two solitudes in Canada - rural and urban are diverging rapidly and, finally, the events in Ukraine are driving the imperative to vigorously prepared for national defence. The gun control initiatives of the present government are serving to amplify division generally. Furthermore, the gun control initiatives are attacking and alienating the very law-abiding citizens who possess the fortitude and predilection to come to arms should it be required.
Click Here: Military Preparedness
As a nation, now more than ever, we need to pay close attention to the way we deploy resources. Any energy directed toward political hobbyhorses at this point is folly. To waste money on these programs at any point in history would be frivolous, as the million law-abiding citizens affected offer no public risk – this fact is self-evident; they are all vetted in relation to criminality.
One understands
the challenges of managing a pandemic, it must be said, however, that there
have been many Charter Right infringements and breaches throughout the
pandemic. Prior to the pandemic, there was declining attention to Charter
Rights, the pandemic accelerated a negative trend, a negative trend aggravated
by the subject matter herein. The values that have come to expression in the
Bill of Rights and the Charter of Rights and Freedom hold as equity some 800
years of blood and toil. My father gave the best six years of his life and came
to an early death for the cause of freedom, my Uncle Omer lays at the bottom of
the English Channel having been shot from the sky at 23 years old and I’ve
spent the last 20 years of my life working in defence of Charter Rights. You
have dedicated your entire career to peace order and good governance. I hope
you share my profound dismay at the trivialization of what are our core values
as a nation, for what is at best, political pandering.
Kind Regards,
Neil
E. Thomson
Saturday, March 19, 2022
Dear CBC - Thoughts from a concerned listener
CLICK HERE FOR MY PROFESSIONAL WEBSITE
I have listened to the CBC most of my life. I have found, in the main, good journalism, a source of information that has for the most part been reliable. The CBC brokered in complete ideas rather than sound bites. The CBC, from my perspective, has always been left-leaning, but tolerably so. What I’ve been hearing of late is unmitigated bias and I am sorry to have been compelled to write this letter.
I am interested in economics, it is a subject that brings
the human condition into sharp relief, as the saying goes, money doesn’t talk,
it screams. When I began contemplating economics, I attended my local library
and read books on the subject, had I stopped there, my perspective on economics
would be very skewed as there was only one school of economics represented there
– demand-side economics. Demand-side economics is typically favoured by those
prone to centralized power and planning. The CBC has become like my library, an
organization only interested in offering varying degrees of half the sorry –
unless you stop it, your credibility as a thought leader will end, your
credibility as journalists will end, your credibility as a truth-tellers will
end and your (OUR) organization will eventually come to an end. I think the CBC
has value, it offers the opportunity for an objective voice – you’ve forfeited that
opportunity and taken up sides.
What compelled me to write this letter is the completely inadequate
way the “Truckers’ Convoy” was covered. The new word of choice from the left
was used liberally, “populists”, code now for non-intellectuals, racists and
ult-right were directed toward the Truckers. CBC programs reporting offering “retrospective
analysis” of the convoy featured Donald Trump early in the program –
intentionally, I believe, to associate the Truckers with Trump-style politics. What
I witnessed in the coverage was very close to pro-government propaganda, rather
than, reporting that brokered in complete ideas. None of the nuances associated
with the issues being raised there were given coverage, the CBC sensationalized
news in a manner that makes CNN and Fox news look unadulterated.
The Charter of Rights and Freedoms, particularly the first
15 sections, are the foundation of our rule of law, the guiding principles of
our society generally. The Charter holds as equity, in functional government,
400 years of common law jurisprudence. The Charter holds as equity 1000 years
of spilled blood and toil. The Charter was Championed, firstly, by Diefenbaker
in the Bill of Rights and then, equally as vigorously, by Trudeau senior. The
Charter’s values are expressed in the United Nations charter. The principles in
the Charter emanated from the enlightenment – Lock, Voltaire, Hume and the
like. Voltaire’s famous quote - enlightenment “is removing the bit from their
teeth and the bridle from their head”. The CBC, in failing to in a meaningful
way, address the breath of the issues, Charter issues among them, associated
with Truckers convoy, the CBC seemed to simply be replacing one bridle for
another.
One of the issues that has been present throughout the
pandemic has been the question of medical freedom, the right to the domain over
mind and body. The right to medical choice is enshrined in our legal system.
Normally, our right to medical choice is governed by Section 7 of the Charter –
The right to life, liberty, and security of person. The spirit of Section 7, heavily
distilled is as follows, one can do as they please absent harm to others. The
only means by which this state of liberty can be interrupted is by the
application of fundamental law. The pandemic response was wrought with infringements
and breaches of this right and others – none of which have been covered by the
CBC in a meaningful way. There is no
compelling evidence I can find when contextualizing the pandemic response to
the fair balance test, that justified the response that was undertaken in many
cases.
If one takes a cursory pursual of the world’s countries with
an eye toward personal freedom and prosperity you’ll find a few things in
common amongst the most prosperous and free; the rule of law, a “free” market,
and companionate social policies. These are the elements of Canadian society that
have brought Canadians to the pinnacle of human existence, they should be
supported by a nationally-funded organization like the CBC. I hear anti-capitalist
rhetoric, nihilistic discourse toward the hand that has fed us so generously,
the CBC should stop biting the hand that feeds us and by extension the CBC.
The national narrative has become fragmented, the population
philosophically fragmented – the country is becoming illiberal. The vitriol levelled
against anti-vaxxers is proof positive that scapegoatism is alive and well in
Canada. The CBC tacitly and explicitly supported the persecution of people with
legitimate concerns regarding vaccines. I never heard an hour-long documentary on
the risks associated with the new vaccines, I never heard any discourse on the
treatability of Covid 19 – the government’s policies were supported by the CBC
with all the vigour of the support given to pre-war eugenics programs. I believe vaccines are the most eloquent
medical solution in human history, I seek them out with vigour. In the case of
several of the vaccines associated with Covid 19, new technology was used, their
safety was unknown and to a degree is still being examined – Sweden has stopped
short of giving them to children, I have yet to hear the CBC examine that
decision in depth.
The CBC as a public broadcaster should be working to
identify the core elements of our nation’s success, understanding the core
elements of our country’s values and principles so purposely and effectively
expressed in our Charter of Rights and Freedoms and then offer programming that supports
a unified narrative on the core elements of our federation. The job of every
citizen of Canada, every institution and the CBC is to protect and preserve the
values expressed in the Charter. The CBC and many others are wallowing in apathy
and, in the minutia, while, insidiously, our freedoms are being taken from us one
concession at a time.
Our system, like the CBC, is flawed – it would be a shame to
lose either of them in my view. This is a friend talking, your present course
of action is sowing the seeds of your own demise.
Tuesday, March 15, 2022
Generosity Works - Minimum Income - Fairer & cheaper to deliver
One can judge the quality of a
society by the way it treats its poor, the government has a role in extending
care to those who are unfortunate – “what you do to the least of my brethren
you do to me” someone once said – I love the quote because it personalizes the
issue. The challenge, of course, is striking a balance between extending help
to the unfortunate and taxing those who can help, out of existence. Please,
before you dismiss minimum income out of hand, consider the following.
My stepfather Charlie McDowell, lived through an economic rationalization, aptly dubbed the “Dirty Thirties”, the hardship he and his family faced was unbearable, at least to hear of, and more so, to think that it could happen again to my grandsons. Another man I knew was Rod McIndoe, he too lived through the thirties, a bigger than life kind of a man – logger and contractor; I ran some regurgitated anti-unemployment rhetoric by him one day thinking he might approve, he looked at me and laughed as though to say “if you only knew” – then he said, “it is the only thing keeping us from another depression”; this took place in the 1970s. These two men were the epitome of self-made and self-reliant and they both taught me the value of compassion and they had no inhibition in suggesting there was a role to play for government in helping the less fortunate. They knew hardship, the kind of hardship that let you go to bed cold with a growling stomach. They knew a hardship, I’d wager, that has never been experienced by a single person governing this country at the moment, me included.
Whether you're poor because you're unemployed, underemployed, retired absent income or disabled – you're poor, you require resources. Presently we have several government departments dispensing funds to the people in need of help, CPP, Employment Insurance, Social Services … the list goes on. Every department has its own administration, set of criteria for helping, and complex operations – all of which represent OVERHEAD that adds to the costs of delivering services. Worse, much of the thrust of the administration of the programs is to ensure that people are only getting what they are entitled to – in large measure these departments assess people against set criteria and dispense funds accordingly. This is, at its core, a policing function, the challenge that arises from this process is an administrative cost, dollars spent running a department instead of helping people. If we are going to spend money helping the people who have a circumstance the effects poverty, we need to ensure that the money we allocate for help – helps.
The simplest way to ensure a base living is to provide everyone with a base income. The government would simply distribute cheques to everyone, every two weeks, those who had income exceeding the base amount would have the “base income” “clawed back” (taken back) at tax time. This is a very elegant solution, we can be more generous, the stigma associated with social service use is gone and a base living is established.
This also is a de facto floor on
living generally; minimum wage, for example, would be rendered redundant, given
that the marginal advantage of employment would force wages to a living wage.
The other advantage here with respect to minimum wage, is that absent the need
for a minimum wage for adults, the market could accommodate youth – as it is
often the complaint with minimum wages that the youth are affected due to the
axis of experience and employment cost working against them. The disincentive to take an
entry-level position would be nullified by structuring the program in a manner
that accounts for the marginal benefit of working – that is to say – there would
be a graduated exit from minimum income to full employment that would incent participation
in the low paid employment strata.
Self Reliance is an under touted value now days, the ability to care for one’s own by one’s own initiative and skills. Self Reliance is a product of knowledge and resources, it needs a launch pad. Some are lucky enough to acquire the elements of Self Reliance from their parent's teaching and the good fortune that applying their skill provides income. Others require that we invest in them, to develop human capital.
Modern society is like none other in human history, in the main, it is much better than ever before, however, it has become faster, more intense to participate in and much more sophisticated. As a result, a larger portion of the population is unable to participate due to an inability to attend to modern technologies and manage the stress associated with a more rapid-paced society. Automation, mechanization, offshore manufacturing, and other macro trends coupled with governments’ inability to educate people, so people can move up the participatory food chain, has also pushed more people to the margins.
In business we often refer to a business as having “critical mass”, having critical mass being a circumstance whereby, the business has optimum capital and human resources to effectively participate in a given market circumstance. Being impoverished is a circumstance of being massless, no resources, and the longer one is impoverished the worse it gets – it is hard to go to a job interview, or knock on any door when you’re missing a front tooth. When an established person’s car breaks down, they call someone and put the repairs on their credit card, an impoverished person misses work or looses work due to the loss of transportation. For the impoverished person, problems are bigger and opportunities are harder to get to.
A minimum income fulfils state obligations to Liberty in Section 7 of the Charter, Life, Liberty and Security of Person. The most coercive element that exists in society is a growling stomach; it is the absence of any secure income that drives people into exploitive circumstances. We can afford to do this, in fact, it is likely to cost less, the minimum income is the most efficient way to deliver resources due to a reduction in administrative costs. It requires the co-operation of the provinces, as it promises to significantly reduce the cost of delivering services they are likely to want to participate.
Minimum Income has inherent in it a
transition, a transition that will eliminate the requirement for the personnel
at the Employment Insurance Department, the CPP Department and several others.
They will see Minimum Income as a threat, they have a job and they want to keep
it – a perfectly understandable position to take – however, position that can foment resistance
to change. They need to be guaranteed that
their interests will be addressed, some will retire, many, with a basket of good
skills, can be redirected to other work the government needs to be done – none should
find themselves in a reduced circumstance.
Saturday, March 12, 2022
Populism - Scourge or Nothing
Populism it seems can be a label levelled at anyone – far-right populists, left-wing populists; there can even be centralist populists. Of late, in the mainstream media, the term is wielded with all the effectiveness of a lightsaber. I only began examining the term because someone called me a populist for pointing out, that while the protestors in Ottawa needed to be made to stop impeding the general population, they had valid points. Having been labelled a populist I thought I should attempt to understand the semantics of the term, I discovered it is a nearly impossible task. I can say, it is readily used by sycophants eager to curry favour with the establishment – merely because populists often are anti-establishment. I do observe that the term is readily used of late by people who expound upon progressive values only to trample them for political interests.
Click here: MY PROFESSIONAL WEBSITE
Click here: FOR MORE THOUGHTS ON POLITICS
If living through the cold war years, worried about the
nuclear holocaust and then, feeling the euphoria of seeing the Fall of the
Wall, and then again, having to fear for humanity, then making observations and
criticisms of the “establishment” that allowed it to happen means I am a
“populist”, I guess I am. If watching governments make the same mistakes over
and over again, and then making observations, criticisms and suggestions to the
“establishment” to correct said mistakes, makes me a “populist”, then I guess I
am. If speaking truth to power to correct massive distortions in the public’s
map of reality makes me a “populist”, then I guess I am. If an undying
commitment to the cause of freedom, civil rights and the rule of law makes me a
“populist”, I guess I am. If pointing out, that the post-Bretton Woods world
order, despite the “establishment’s foibles”, effected the greatest advancement
for humanity GENERALLY in human history makes me a populist, I guess I am. If by pointing out that bad capitalism caused
the blight this is destroying the prosperity a market economy in concert with
compassionate governance can give, makes me a “populist”, I guess I am.
I read an article once that said we overrate character and
underrate the environment. We are all a product of our environment and at times,
no matter our will, no matter our intent, no matter character – environment
wins – events dear boy, events. The challenge we are facing now is that we have
100-year problems and 4-year leaderships. Challenges of the nature of
Afghanistan are 100 hundred-year challenges. We have left a mess in
Afghanistan; we have abandoned courageous who people who fought and died for
the cause of freedom. The mere glimpse of an opportunity to have our way of
life and they risked everything for it, we left them the very tyrants that
attacked us and have propagated a multitude of affronts to humanity – worse, we
left the tyrants better armed and stronger. Was this Joe Biden’s fault, no,
George Bush’s fault, no, the good men and women that risked their lives for the
cause of freedom, no. The thing that has wrought our efforts is systemic,
everyone is willing to use anything to differentiate themselves every four
years. The polls erode resolve, we fold – this pattern has brought
us to where we are.
You can speak to any informed person anywhere on the
political spectrum and explain the destabilizing effect of inequity in society,
you can point to a thousand historical examples where inequality has caused
calamitous outcomes – they will see the problem. Why then does inequity exist,
because, never in human history has someone found a source of prosperity and
avoided wanting to build a monopoly. The way this propensity merges with
democracy – success generates resources, resources influence the acquisition of
power – creates regulatory capture, regulatory capture impairs disruption /
creative destruction, stifles innovation, generates red tape and creates
barriers to entry for non-incumbent actors. This all feeds inequity, the
affected parties become disgruntled and seek other solutions; by failing to
effectively address this issue, the prosperity of the most successful is
endangered, as is the elevated standard of living we all enjoy is threatened.
The single biggest element in our democracy that allows
systemic failure is the absence of proper accountability functions in
government. The second element is the incapacity to generate long-term policy;
this is exacerbated by the nature of modern discourse and division. The first is fixed
by making government accountability functionality a priority and transparent to the
electorate – this way facts rule, metrics rule, clearly stated outcome is
achieved or not and spin looses traction. The second is mitigated by adherence
to first principles as expressed in our constitution and expressing in clear
terms the source of our good fortune. If
working toward making democracy work so it improves the lot of all and effects
a generalized state of prosperity makes me a “populist”, I guess I am.
Wednesday, March 9, 2022
National Defence - PREPARE PREPARE PREPARE
The degree
to which Canada’s ability to defend itself has been degraded is alarming. The
situation in Ukraine has highlighted the fact that the post-WW2 world order is
fraying. The west generally has walked away from confrontation, demonstrated a
lack of resolve and abandoned allies in nearly every major confrontation since WW2.
A multi-polar world similar in nature to pre-WW1 has emerged. We are sitting atop
of a tinderbox comprised of strident competitors, a multi-polar geopolitical reality,
a perception by our competitors that we are unwilling to throw down the gloves
and a lack of realization on the part of leadership and the population
generally how fast our way of life can end.
Click here: MY PROFESSIONAL WEBSITE
Click here: FOR MORE THOUGHTS ON POLITICS
Imagine a scenario
whereby, the Ukraine / Russian conflict ends with Russian success. Imagine then
that there is a push by Russia into eastern Europe. Imagine then, China sees the
build-up of troops in eastern Europe and the resulting depletion of troops in
the Pacific Region as an opportunity to take back Taiwan. Imagine then that China
sees an opportunity to expand its efforts in a manner that challenges the US
proper. Imagine the US military is preoccupied with this reality and Canada comes
under attack and we no longer have the US to rely on to defend our country – as
they have done vicariously since, it would be safe to say, 1960. Now we must
defend ourselves. It is fundamental that as a nation we can defend ourselves,
to hold our own territory against all comers. Presently, given the state of our
military and the expanse that is Canada, we would be unable to defend ourselves.
Whether the need to protect our country
comes via this scenario or another is really of no issue, the issue, however,
is if the need were to come now, we are ill-prepared.
When the crunch
comes there is only you and I to defend our country and the people we love. Institutions
are absent the ability to fire a gun, you and I must do that. It is important
that as leaders we prepare for the worst, Machiavelli in his book Prince and
Principalities expounds on the obligation of the “Prince”, ergo leader, to
peruse his territory and contemplate its defence – I am eager to remind you, the
world has changed little since he offered this advice. I have thought a great
deal about how we might defend Canada, it is a complex task. The only certainty in
this contemplation at this point is that the military is under-resourced to do
the job, it would fall to civilians in concert with the military to defend Canada.
It is for this reason that we must prepare our civilian population for the task
and introduce the military to civilians in a manner that facilitates a
productive interface should the need arise.
OTHER THINKING ON THE SUBJECT
I am in
constant contact with young Canadians, they are adventurous people – jumping from
planes, skiing off cliffs, repelling off the side of mountains – they are fit and
tough and what we will need when the chips are down. Further, I am familiar with the cultural make-up
of the million firearm owners, hunters and gun sport enthusiasts, people who we will need when the chips are down. We have four-wheel drive clubs, snowmobile clubs, and mountaineering clubs – all people we will need when the chips are down. We have
a wealth of professional groups – tech specialists to engineers – all people we’ll
need when the chips are down. The key to defending Canada is exciting the capacities
of these groups to effect our defence. The sooner we call on them all, the
sooner we integrate their willingness and capability the better prepared we
will be. I believe, if you queried most Canadians, if we found ourselves in
Ukraine’s position if they would you help defend us – they would answer yes.
The Swiss model
is admirable, in that, every able-bodied person is trained to participate in
the defence of the nation. The government, as a product of interfacing with
their people through training, believes in its people enough to trust them to
have and use firearms in an appropriate way. The only drawback I see in this
model, as I understand it, is participation is mandatory. The model I would
suggest for civil defence would be like the Swiss model, only less formalized and
voluntary. The goal of creating an effective defence force is to extract human
and physical assets from the civilian population in a way that mitigates the
cost of activity the civilian population chooses to do anyway and in so doing you
mitigate the cost of to government having access to those assets.
By way of
example, of the million restricted and vetted gun owners in Canada many are
enthusiasts and as such spend their time honing firearm skills in the military
context. These groups, usually in gun clubs, could be approached and brought
into the civil defence fold. If one reflects on Ukraine’s circumstances now,
they are handing firearms out to people who have had little experience with
them. I am a civilian that has spent my life in BC’s wilderness, and I am a
pretty good shot, I think they would love to have me in Ukraine right now – if Canada
ever suffers a similar fate, we want everyone with skills to be ready and
available to interface effectively with the military. If the government were to
approach this group and offer to provide them with military-issue firearms
and supply ammunition to practice with, and to keep these firearms and sundry
related items at the ready in the event of strife, many of this group would be
happy to participate. Further, if the military were to offer attractive and
exciting training opportunities, like repelling out of helicopters etc., along
with a “community” / “social” element to the process the skill set of this
group would be greatly expanded.
This model
could be expanded to other groups as well, four-wheel-drive clubs, for example,
have local knowledge, explore the countryside in groups of vehicles and
would enjoy the opportunity to interface with military personnel in various ways.
Many are hunters and pursue other outdoor sports, hence they have a unique skill set that represents an asset in the civil defence space – civilian evacuation, troop
movement, munitions transport and the like. There is a huge resource in the civilian
population in the form of existing assets that the government can access by offsetting
the cost of ownership by intermittent payment, tax considerations etc. thereby,
increasing capacity many many fold at little or no extra capital cost.
Formal military
training is useful and can be provided via a modularized educational
program. The goal would be to offer the training on a self-paced basis or to
interface with civilian organizations' skill groups. By way of example, you may
have a person in a gun club that is a part of the military program and is a
heavy-duty mechanic – you could provide an online course augmented with onsite training
to have them certified on equipment that is peculiar to the military – upon completion, you would reward this person for their time and offer other benefits for being
at the ready and to retain their interests. This type of human capital comes at
a greatly reduced cost relative to full-time military personnel.
The reality
at the moment is, that if Canada were in the same situation as Ukraine, we would
have to augment military capacity with civil assets – so we should build out
that interface NOW. The other reality is, if faced with a conventional army like
the Russian army we would be forced to defend ourselves in unconventional
ways. We’ve been taught these unconventional modalities in a very painful way
in Afghanistan, we should take that lesson and apply it to our circumstances. We
can teach people to be gorilla warriors, we can prepare for such a war and we
should.
President Eisenhower
warned of the “military complex” and its motivations and expansion. When the government embarks on procurement for
anything, especially a new piece of military equipment, nobody is setting out save
the government money, they are there to make money. I recently read an article about
a new gun the Canadian military developed and purchased, a gun, when I divided the
total dollar amount spent on the guns by the number of guns purchased, I
arrived at a number of approximately $2500 – I am assuming this was a typo. At
the fall of the wall, the Taliban was buying Kalashnikovs for about $50. The
first 303 British I purchased I paid $30 for, and I could buy ammunition to
practice with at Surplus Herbies for pennies a shot. We likely have millions of
303 British warehoused somewhere, they are old, outmoded, still, in the hands of
a half million Canadians sitting on hillsides, they would be a serious thorn in
the side of an enemy. Taliban, with Kalashnikovs, wearing sandals, sent the world's
two most powerful armies home with unmet objectives – effectively defeated. While in Canada, Canadian moms are researching the safest SUV to drive Jonny to
preschool, young Afghan kids are cutting their teeth on the butt of their Dad’s
Kalashnikovs, listening to how great grandfather beat the British is a nearby pass
and then again how his Dad killed a squad of Americans the exact same way 100
years later. The point I am making here, it is culture and the willingness to
defend ourselves that will determine our success, if we are smart we can likely
do it with what we have on hand – never underestimate the power of 34-0-0 and diesel
fuel in the hands of the most resourceful people in the world.
I can hear many
in Canada’s academic circles saying, Neil, you are advocating militarizing our country;
this is an action that promotes war. Worse, you’re advocating trusting everyday citizens
with firearms and knowledge related to defence. This is my question for them,
how many are advocating returning to Afghanistan to promote human rights or to
even bring to Canada the young Afghan people who risked their lives in the
pursuit of our way of life – very few if any. Why? The Taliban offers too strong
of a deterrent. I advocate these measures because I know and because it is a
truth clearly indicated by history, that the best deterrent is capacity – capacity
means the likelihood of my grandsons ever having to use a rifle is greatly reduced.
Friday, March 4, 2022
Letter to Parliament - Overarching Narrative Required
The events of the past few years, primarily the Covid 19 response, but also, the disaster response in British Columbia and the events related to Ukraine have brought serious societal fissures and governance deficiencies into resolution. The propensity for every challenge that faces us being distorted by political discourse and then the extreme division it is causing has become alarming. There are many causal factors coming to play, the one that is most damaging is the fragmentation of our nation’s narrative, the cleaving of social perspective between “progressives” and “anti-capitalism” movements versus the “establishment”. This internal competition for hearts and minds is played upon by external players whose interests are served by exacerbating social division.
Canada is an exemplary country, we educate our people, we have a compassionate social perspective, and we enjoy a standard of living that puts us at the pinnacle of human existence – ever. The social strife that has been emerging is threatening both the egg and the goose, there are movements afoot that are keen to throw away the various systems and institutions that provided us with all we have. I observe governments, businesses, professionals, and members of the public conducting themselves in contempt of the foundational elements of our society, treating fundamentals like the rule of law, hard-won civil liberties as hurdles to get over rather than attending to both the spirit and the letter of the law. When foundational elements of our society, the very principles our country is founded on, are seen to be manipulated or ineffective a crack opens for further division fueled by “revolutionary” and competing narratives.
What is
missing is an overarching narrative, one that is held by us all. I have posted
Section 7 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms on various social media platforms
and encountered people afraid to give it an open and hardy affirmation, yet
they will in confidence – I hope this concerns you all. In my youth attending
our public education system, there were many many instances when teachers would
contrast our free society with that of the Soviet Union. George Orwell’s book Animal
Farm was read aloud to me by my teacher in grade 6 and we talked about the evils
of unchecked and centralized state power. I would encounter a clear and
common narrative that our way of life, our governance modalities and institutions
supported by our market system was the best system there is. There are two
things Canadians need to know, that they are presently the most prosperous
people in human history and how that happened – unless priority is given to
ensuring that Canadians do know, our society will unravel and all we’ve built
here will implode under the weight of a people with maps of reality distorted by political
spin and the voices of dissidents foreign and domestic.
OTHER THINKING ON THE SUBJECT
The first
step in the process then is agreeing on a narrative that serves to stabilize and
support our country and our values and secondly, propagandizing that narrative.
One symbolic gestor to start the process would be to have every member of parliament
stand at attention in front of the parliament buildings while the first 15
Sections of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms scrolled by on big screens with Old
Canada playing and the entire undertaking being streamed to every media channel
in the country. The process would close with the Governor-General giving a
short speech extending to Canadians permission to preserve and protect the
values expressed in the Charter of Rights and Freedoms with vigour and pride. Our people and the enemies of freedom
need to see we stand together and for something.
Having
agreed on the theme of the overarching narrative, the government could actively
promote the narrative through various initiatives – more intensive Canadian
Studies in schools and actively market the narrative via various media forums.
Further, the subversion of western values is hardly contained in our borders –
it is far-reaching. We need a collective effort on the part of the CBC in concert
with like-minded entities like the BBC, ABC and others to tell the story of our
prosperity – a truth demonstrated by merely listing the most prosperous peoples
in the world – the G20 to start – who have gained their prosperity by the
combination of civil rights, a market economy and robust social supports.
Unless we fill
the void, the absent narrative, others will fill it with their own interests in
mind; the assent of authoritarianism will continue unabated. Shakespeare taught us that “the
pen is mightier than the sword”, however, unless the pen is used pervasively and
persuasively apathy will leave no other option than the sword. The world is standing
on a precipice, rarely has our way of life been more challenged – the “dark
clouds of authoritarianism” are looming – action is required now.
Monday, February 21, 2022
Emergencies Measures Act - it all depends on the context in which it is deployed.
Emergencies Measure Act.
The Covid
response has been a series of Charter infringements and breaches in my opinion.
I have seen no clear data to support many of the measures taken. One can argue
whether or not the steps taken were warranted, there is no argument that the
manner in which they were taken failed to attend to the spirit of the Charter
of Rights and Freedoms and civil rights generally. This reality is part and parcel
of the degradation of civil rights in Canada, both governmental and in the populace.
Further, there has been utter contempt for people attempting to exercise their
charter rights. Perhaps most alarming has been the press’s complete abandonment
of the core issues related to civil rights either through ignorance or
willful blindness. The vitriol has been fueled by political concern and the “follow
the science mantra”, science offered by vested interests, science focused on one
element of public concern rather than a fulsome view, the squelching of public
discourse, the unparallel zealotry forcing people with legitimate concern to
medical treatment has been frightening to watch.
CLICK HERE FOR MY PROFESSIONAL WEBSITE
The
Pandemic is a circumstance where the Emergencies Measures act was designed to
be used. As I stated previously, “Had the Emergency Measures Act been activated
at the outset of the pandemic, it would be a matter of public record as to why
and its purposes, it would have been subordinated to the Charter and subject
oversight by parliament, thus providing a legal umbrella to administer the law under,
specifically the Emergency Measures Act. (EMA) and then the law generally. In
this way, social distancing, and other measures, such as restricting the right
to assembly, liberty, mobility and medical choice would have been exercised
under the EM act - rather than arbitrarily as they were in many cases. This
process would have provided a clear statutory point of delineation - "date
x" civil rights were intruded on and on "date b" it is now over.
Further, and as concerning, in allowing the provinces to do this on an ad hoc basis, absent
federal authority clearly given, federal paramountcy is weakened. It is, for
this reason, that I am seeking input from various parties for information
on the federal government’s direction on these issues.”
The Emergencies
Measures Act. is designed to attend to the gradation in events, from large-scale domestic concerns, like the Pandemic, to a state of war – and there are
provisions that are peculiar to each circumstance in the act. By way of
example, there was a perception on the part of the government that certain health
measures were required to stop the spread of the Covid 19, these measures
intruded in varying degrees on people’s Charter rights, and they did so in a
manner that was exterior to fundamentals law. The proper approach would have
been the implementation of the EMA with parliamentary oversight which included
an EMA activation mission statement, the assumptions made in activating the act
and then a clear set of metrics that verified or refuted said assumptions which
would have been reviewed in short and regular intervals. Further, the inherent time constraints in the
act could only permit the extension of the EMA’s use should the metrics indicate
the use was warranted. Most importantly, the assessment of the varsity of the EMA’s
use would be given to an actor at arm’s length from the government so as to
avoid politicization of the process – leaving parliament to act solely on facts
as opposed to rhetoric.
In British
Columbia, the implementation of Vaccine Passports (VPs) amounts to a de facto forced
vaccination program. The manner in which the government designed the VP skirted
a direct charter breach by limiting the use of the VP to nonessential services –
this is a clear demonstration that the government fails to respect the spirit
of the charter and this precedent weakens the charter, or it will if it goes
unchallenged. The VP policy infringes on freedom of association in that it
precluded association and it shaped the nature of the association. Had the
government offered the VP’s as a service to which businesses and people could
choose to subscribe, then there would have been no breach. People have the
right to associate on whatever basis they choose, and each party can determine
the risk level of that association. The greater concern of overwhelming the
hospital system holds marginal weight – one can demonstrate, I think, that the government’s
adherence to system limitations was of their own making – there was a clear
opportunity through the creative deployment of resources to expand capacity. Further, it is hard to find a clear
justification for the extent of government action relative to risk. Nor is it
clear that mandatory intrusion on civil rights was justified, that is to say,
that there is credible work that challenges the efficacy of mandates as people
tend to “lockdown” of their own accord as they perceive risk.
The
pandemic was the reason the EMA was developed, it clearly meets the rationale expressed
in the EMA and would have clearly withstood the rigours of statutory interpretation.
In EMA’s absence, the measures taken by the provinces were, as I read the
charter, illegal in many instances.
CLICK HERE FOR MY PROFESSIONAL WEBSITE
The
actuation of the EMA in response to the trucker’s protests is less clear. The
protests are isolated to just a few locations and dealing with civil disobedience
is regularly managed under the rubric of laws to maintain domestic order –
these events failed to meet the threshold for a national emergency. The
protesters were in the main non-violent – theirs’s was an effort in civil disobedience
in the same magnitude of protestors blocking a road or a railroad as we see
often related to environmental issues. The marginality of the application of
the EMA was exacerbated by the reality that the mandate that provoked the
protest was in large measure overtaken by events. I think the courts will view
the use of this act in this way as heavy-handed at the least.
The Canadian
constitution, Bill of Rights and Charter of Rights of Freedoms are the bedrock
that our legal system rests upon, and by extension, our society rests upon them.
Unless we defend this body of law, it will be reduced to words on a page. The principles
expressed in this body of law have emancipated more than half of humanity in 800 hundred years. They are born of the great enlightenment, and they gave
birth to women’s suffrage, and reproductive rights, they stopped the forced sterilization
of the handicapped, they’ve almost, by not entirely, protected against the
mentally ill being forced to lobotomy, they’ve protected against the tyranny of
the majority. We are supposed to be autonomous individuals in a free country, watch
carefully, because that concept is being challenged with vigour. The cause of
freedom is in jeopardy; its enemies - apathy, political expediency, and a
decline of the population who fought to earn it for us.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)