Ban on Twitter on Election Night?

If you live in Canada, and have voted before in a federal election, you know there is a media ban on election night. That is to say the media are literally fined a significant amount if they violate a strict ban on reporting results from out East before ballots in BC are closed.

Elections Canada seems to have an unfounded fear that seeing results of ridings in Newfoundland and Nova Scotia may unduly influence voters to the West, a claim that has been largely refuted. Despite that, even ten years ago, the major media conglomerates bowed to the wishes of the law, and refrained from broadcasting results nationwide as they came in before the ballots were closed.

Fast forward to today. In the era of instant internet video, tweeting, facebook statuses and digital communication, that information could be readily available and posted literally across the country in seconds. What this means is that even the major media giants, such as Canwest, cannot maintain a live-streaming blog of results, they cannot post ongoing information and results until BC closes.

What this also means?

• It will also be illegal for any citizen, journalist or not, to tweet or blog or post something on a Facebook wall about the election results, until all the polls are shut.

If you think you're immune, the same issue happened in 2000, just before the internet explosion of data.  A prominent blogger in Vancouver, Paul Bryan blogged Atlantic results before the polls were closed to his small audience, he was fined $1 000.  He took his case straight up the courts to the Supreme Court, and was defeated there.

Draconian?  Yes.  Are they going to do it?  Well in our minds, how could they.  One look at the #elxn41 hash tag and you can see immediately that thousands of Canadians are updating every hour, posting news, opinions, links and observations on the unfolding election.  When we all go to the polls, you can bet that there will be posting immediately as well.

• Nonetheless, John Enright, who speaks for Elections Canada, says his agency has no choice but to administer the law as written. Citizens are allowed to phone or text friends, or send private e-mails. But posting to a Facebook wall, to a webpage or to Twitter will be considered a violation.
  
  "The legislation is still on the books, so our role as Elections Canada is to administer the legislation that is before us," says Enright. "If there's a breach of the law, Elections Canada is not going to discriminate between the Mothercorp and Joe Smith down the street."

The courts have decided the law won't be looked at prior to May 2nd.

Scary isn't it?  Where do we stand, why hasn't this absurd sheepist law been repealed yet?  And furthermore what does it mean for our democracy when ordinary citizens are going to be muzzled from spreading information?




The Article Here from Montreal Gazette
http://www.montrealgazette.com/news/decision-canada/Twitter+Facebook+election+night+posts+draconian/4647769/story.html

An Article from the Globe and Mail
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/ottawa-notebook/officials-mull-election-night-twitter-muzzling-rule/article1994365/

Conservative Twitter Fail 2

So Almost a week later, 5 days at this point now, still no response from the Conservative engine through social media on a number of topics posted, nor even really a greeting or hello.  I constructed both an email and a physical letter, and have sent them off requesting information from Laurie Hawn's office.  Now we start the clock, will we get a response?  Will the conservative MP ever address or even acknowledge my concerns?

In my 600 ish word email/letter, I have broached the serious concern that many Canadians have that the party itself of the Conservatives seem to have lost the moral ability to govern.  Which is not necessarily a poor reflection on Mr Hawn himself, but rather that I am concerned that our government no longer accurately represents our people, and instead has it's own agenda which is not being shared in a clear, and transparent manner.  Furthermore I am of the opinion that the lack of transparency is being deliberately misused in a corrupt manner by both duly elected officials, and appointed ones.

The questions have begun to stack up, and slowly become overwhelming.  Why is there no forthcoming answer on the Afghan Detainee issue?  Why is there no fiscal transparency on the F35 crisis?  What is the Prime Ministers opinion on the procedural failure that happened during the G8/G20 Summit.  What are the steps of progression on climate change, especially in the light of Copenhagen?  How does the government account itself for the repeated calls of contempt on the part of its ministers, such as Bev Oda?

These are moral questions on the minds of Canadians, will they not be addressed?  Will they not be answered?  Will they not even be acknowledged?  Are they existent only in the present moment of time when they are brought up and then hopefully forgotten by our own government?

The F-35 Issue

The F-35 Issue is springing up again, as a cornerstone of fiscal discrepancy in the Conservative platform.  Partisan Liberals and NDP have tremendous, and quite well founded concerns about the Conservative's plan to purchase 65 Lockheed Martin Jets, at around 75 million an aircraft, for an estimated 14 billion dollars total.  I just want to point out the scope of that number.  14 Billion Dollars.

Not only is that 14 billion dollars, but it seems everyone except the conservatives are quite sure that number can't possibly be correct.  It's too small by half.  Parliamentary Budget Officer Kevin Page thinks the number is more like 29 Billion Dollars.

29 Billion Dollars.

That's more than twice the cost.  Someone thinks they are getting a two for one deal that doesn't exist!  And Mr. Kevin Page isn't the only one who figures that number.  Mike Sullivan, a  man who works with the Government Accountability Office says the tag of 75 million per aircraft is too low, instead it will be more along the lines of 110 or 115 million each.  In a link at the end of this article, CBC also posted a quick FAQ on the F-35, which directly state the cost of the F-35 as being 155 Million American per Jet. 

American Defense Specialist Winslow Wheeler also weighed in.

• “If Canada’s government can get an F-35 for the mid-70 million dollars per airplane, well they should sign a contract right now and get it delivered.  Because I can promise you nobody on this earth will ever get a flying F-35 for $75 million per copy. It’s pure fantasy."

Retired General Paul Manson, former Chief of Staff took umbrage at the comments, attacking Wheeler's credibility.  However Mr. Wheeler has worked for 30 years on defense issues in the States for both Republican and Democrat members.  And he spent 9 years as an analyst for Accountability pertaining specifically to military procurement, and aircraft.

I still have trouble wrapping my head around the sheer numbers.  So let's look at it this way.  29 Billion dollars, translates for every single head in Canada to about 900 dollars of additional tax a person, going directly to the cost of purchasing or maintaining these pieces of aircraft.  That 900 dollars by the way is assuming your children pay taxes that go to defence materials.  I assume they don't, but you never know.  900 dollars each, to make 29 Billion dollars, for a plane that has no capability to do Search and Rescue, which is one of the primary functions of our own Canadian Air Force right now.

Oh and by the way?  Montreal Gazette has pointed out that those numbers?  They don't include the cost of an engine.  That 75 million dollar price tag per aircraft?  No Engines.  NO ENGINES!  I don't go out and buy an SUV without an Engine.  Why IS THE GOVERNMENT DOING THAT?

This was mostly touched off today by a tweet Conservative MP Laurie Hawn posted today:

• votelauriehawn Laurie Hawn
  Libs let CF dangle in decade of darkness and would clearly do it again on F-35. #cdnpoli #elxn41
   

I responded within twenty minutes with:

• lesterleesm Lester Lee
  @votelauriehawn How do you account for the discrepancy of price, almost twice the cost than stated, RE:Kevin Page? #elxn41

• @votelauriehawn Defense specialist Wheeler also says the planes cost more like 150 million, twice PM Harper's estimate. #elxn41

Tony Dewar, a Student at Okanagan College also chipped in.

• MrTonyDewar Tony Dewar
  @lesterleesm @votelauriehawn Every single person asked except the Cons say that the F-35 costs are going to be at least 29 billion. #elxn41

• @lesterleesm Your welcome. I believe Kevin Page the parliamentary budget officer, numbers myself. He seems to be right on the money.#elxn41

 Haven't gotten a response from Laurie Hawn yet, and am not sure one is coming.  But there it all is, make an informed opinion!  And what do you think, Canada, of our spending choices on government weaponry?


The Article from Montreal Gazette:
http://www.montrealgazette.com/news/Canada+Engines+included/4629251/story.html

Article from The Globe and Mail
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/ottawa-notebook/harper-says-f-35s-wont-cost-more/article1979046/

CBC Article on The Spiraling Costs of the F-35
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/story/2011/04/05/pol-fighter-jet-cost.html

CBC Article, an FAQ on the F-35
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/story/2010/07/16/f-f35-faq.html

Satirical Video: Students Don't Vote

Just a quick post, The Students Association of Mount Royal University students produced a great satirical video telling students around the country not to vote, and why.

Excellent work SAMRU!  Keep sending the word out, and get engaged!

I don't know if you should read the comments though on their youtube video page though...it's a little depressing.

iPod Tax Bullshit

If you're like me, you probably really detest attack ads.  Especially done in such a flagrantly biased manner.  The one that has caught the eye of Patrick though, and then brought to my attention is this fairly recent one about the iPod tax that Michael Ignatieff 'supports'.  I say 'supports' because McLean's magazine has recently completely debunked and explained the theory as to why the Conservative party is using this particular tidbit as one of their attack points.

McLean's writes:

• The claim a $75 levy was ever on the table—and that it was supported by the Liberals—is dubious for two reasons: first, contrary to Conservative claims, the Copyright Board never suggested the levy should be up to $75. That amount was proposed by a non-profit called the Canadian Private Copying Collective, which collects and distributes private copying royalties. But while they may not be the ones who collect it, it’s the Copyright Board that fixes levies on MP3 players, such as the ones that were in place until a December 2004 Federal Court decision struck them down. These ranged from $2 to $25.

• Secondly, the Liberals changed their policy on taxing digital audio devices in December and have explicitly rejected the notion of an “iPod levy.” They now support compensating artists with a yearly transfer of $35 million.

There is an immense amount of difficulty in trying to rationalize some of these strange points the Conservatives are making, so kudos to McLean's Erica Alini for digging deep into the truth of it.

What we also notice though, being savvy social media users and Web 2.0 people, is that Conservatives have denied access of comments and likes/dislikes on all their ads posted to youtube.  Probably to prevent exactly this sort of thing from happening, from people digging to find the truth, and then pointing out their references and citations at how these 'ads' are untrue.

The Conservatives are, to my understanding, the only party to be denying the people their direct input on their campaign this way.  All the NDP videos I've seen welcome discussion and discourse over them, admittedly I haven't seen a lot of videos from the Liberals yet, but Patrick says they too are open for discussion.  The Conservative Party seems intent on running their campaign in a bubble, an allegation that has been leveled against them time and time again.

The sad thing, is that many people will not explore further into these attack ads.  And could very well be turned away from their nominal voting choice by untrue statements and proclamations.

This is neither fair, nor a way I should think we want our government to conduct itself.


McLean's Article about the 'iPod Tax':
http://www2.macleans.ca/2011/04/05/the-bull-meter-the-conservatives-on-the-liberals-ipod-tax/

The Conservative Attack Ad:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r_pSUHZZ5Qw

Globe and Mail Weighs In on Ballot Box Grab

Upon further research, and reading more about the incident, it's clear that Mister Michael Sona is the one who could have serious allegations against him.  What he did, in trying to physically grab a ballot box was a violation of Part 9, section 167 (2) D of the Canada Elections Act.

Students across the country are becoming notably disheartened at the disregard that the Conservatives showed towards them exercising their democratic rights.  And who could blame them?  I received the original post over twitter from Pirate Party leader Mikkel Paulson, reposted to facebook and blogged here it was shared more than two dozen times within the hour.

In some ways, this 'incident' goes far and above mere 'partisanship' which is something that many of the parties like to throw out there.  Instead it shows that the party wants to disregard the now mobilizing demographic of student and youth voters.

In the rising groundswell of support, an online petition has also hit the ground, calling for the ballots to be accepted and for the conservatives to drop their investigation.  Will they be successful?  It's hard to tell at this stage, but certainly if it becomes a contentious issue, and especially if those 700 ballots are thrown out, there will be an enormous public outcry, and I shall indeed hope those students will turn out again and vote in a very contentious riding.



The Online Petition for Guelph here:
http://www.leadnow.ca/en/hands-off-our-ballots

Here's the article from the Globe
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/second-reading/silver-powers/about-that-conservative-ballot-box-grab-in-guelph/article1986324/

The 'Thanks Rick Mercer' Article
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/ottawa-notebook/thanks-a-heap-rick-mercer-the-students-might-actually-vote/article1985368/?utm_source=Shared+Article+Sent+to+User&utm_medium=E-mail%3A+Newsletters+%2F+E-Blasts+%2F+etc.&utm_campaign=Shared+Web+Article+Links

Conservative Twitter Fail

Well it looks like 24 hours later, every other politician I followed has followed me back and at least attempted to make an overture of contact.  Every one except Prime Minister Harper, and my own riding Laurie Hawn that is.

What do you think, Canadians?  Is it too much to ask for relevant contact with the politicians in power?  Do you think that there are policies in place that limit conservatives from using social media as a playing field the same way that the NDP, Greens, and Liberals are utilizing it?

Does it say something, that they refuse to connect with tax paying, voting, Canadians like myself, or do you think that I'm expecting too much?

Twitter

Part of what makes living in this time interesting is communication. We've noticed that a lot of candidates are embracing the technology of communicating with their own constituents. Now...it's hard to actually tell of course if you're discoursing with the candidate themselves, or a campaign manager or media person...if it's not downright impossible. And trust me, I'm not so naive to believe that it's actually the candidate with their fingers on their phones tweeting their thoughts, but it would be nice wouldn't it?

But for those who are interested, Edmonton City Center Candidates are indeed on twitter!

As an experiment, I followed all four that I know of using twitter in one fell swoop.

Laurie Hawn of the Conservatives is http://twitter.com/#!/votelauriehawn
Mary Maconald of the Liberal Party is http://twitter.com/#!/Mary_MacDonald
Lewis Cardinal of the NDP is http://twitter.com/#!/LewisCardinal
Even Mikkel Paulson of the Pirate Party! http://twitter.com/#!/mikkelpaulson

I also issued a challenge to them. lesterleesm Lester Lee
Now following the 3 candidates for #yeg CCenter: @votelauriehawn @Mary_MacDonald and @LewisCardinal. I, and Canadians wait to be impressed!

Within minutes, literally minutes Lewis Cardinal responded to me, and refollowed me. We also had a short interchange.

Within a half hour, Mary MacDonald followed me. She hasn't said anything in response to my message though.

The Pirate Party, Mikkel Paulson shouted out, and we had a quick discussion about twitter and how I wasn't able to find him on the CBC...

And the PC Laurie Hawn? Well we're still waiting. Check back tomorrow morning, maybe he and his campaign went to bed early?