The judicial branch

By Aaron Wherry - Wednesday, April 29, 2009 at 12:15 AM - 3 Comments

First, Robert Allen Smith. Then, Omar Khadr. Now, the Military Police Complaints Commission.

And coming soon, In-and-Out.

'Included as well as informed'

By Aaron Wherry - Wednesday, April 29, 2009 at 12:14 AM - 3 Comments

Susan Delacourt’s back in Ottawa and did an online chat with Garth Turner to celebrate.

The fact I am a controversial guy is itself unfortunate, since we need more people in politics who understand that voters come first, not last. I tried to live that view. Hope others will not be daunted, and follow.

Don’t touch my beer!

By Mitchel Raphael - Tuesday, April 28, 2009 at 10:21 PM - 6 Comments

The Emergency Medical Service Chiefs of Canada held a reception in an Ottawa pub on Sparks Street complete with emergency vehicles parked outside. NDP MP Peter Stoffer popped in and refused to let anyone hold his beer when they put him in an emergency chair for a demonstration.

Justice Minister Rob Nicholson.

Continue…

The Commons: Little ditty 'bout Jack and Stephen

By Aaron Wherry - Tuesday, April 28, 2009 at 7:16 PM - 33 Comments

The Scene. By the third of Michael Ignatieff’s questions, the Prime Minister was losing patience. The Liberal leader had considered Mr. Harper’s second answer insufficient and said so out loud and, for sure, such an assertion could not be let alone.

“Mr. Speaker, the answer is the same in French and English,” Mr. Harper said en francais, proceeding to restate his case for the current distribution of employment insurance.

All shrugs and soft tones until then, the Prime Minister switched suddenly back to English, tipping to television producers around the capital that something vaguely noteworthy was about to be said.

“Let me be very clear,” he said, his concept of clarity often having something to do with the failings of the other side, “I am not sure what it is exactly now the leader of the opposition is proposing, but I can assure him that what we will not be doing is raising EI premiums and other taxes on Canadians.”

The government members snapped to their feet to applaud their leader’s non sequitur. But their leader was merely stretching his sneer, warming up as it were for the lesser battle to come. Continue…

MUSIC: BC Herd

By Paul Wells - Tuesday, April 28, 2009 at 7:03 PM - 0 Comments

Since the federal Liberals are meeting in Vancouver this weekend for the high-stakes selection of a new leader — this one could go down to the wire, folks — I’ll be in New Orleans. This makes perfect sense, if you think about it. Unfortunately I’m missing an unusually good weekend of music here in Ottawa, thanks to the climax of the National Arts Centre’s BC Scene festival.

These “scene” scenes have been going on for some years now, and they’re a clever way to address a fundamental dilemma of the NAC’s mandate: how can you be a national arts centre when you’re stuck in the eastern half of a really big country? The answer is to send bits of the NAC — typically their very good orchestra — out into the federation’s assorted constituent parts, and then to bring a very large number of each part’s arts scenes into Ottawa for a festival. So past years have already seen Alberta, Quebec and Atlantic Scenes.

If you’re a jazz and classical head like me, this weekend will be kind of crazy. In both genres, the music on offer is — I chose this term carefully and I mean it heartily — superb. Continue…

When It Makes Sense To Keep a Show Past Its Prime

By Jaime Weinman - Tuesday, April 28, 2009 at 6:27 PM - 5 Comments

With the news that ABC may keep Scrubs on for a ninth season, even though Zach Braff and other actors won’t be able to appear in more than a handful of the episodes, there are two questions: 1) Is this a good idea for the network? 2) Is this a good idea for the show? The answer to 1) is probably a “yes.” Scrubs is not a high-rated show, but because of its desirable demographics, it does better than any comedy ABC could put in its place, and if the network wants to bring back Better off Ted, they will need to keep Scrubs as a lead-in. If they try to renew Better off Ted and put it after a new comedy, or have it lead off the hour, it will probably die almost immediately. The main reason for renewing any show is that the network has nothing to put in its place — nothing that would get better ratings, I mean. Even if a show is missing a key element, like its lead actor, the brand name of a long-running show may be enough for it to out-perform anything new, and keeping the show on allows the network to plug a hole. I know I use baseball analogies too much, but it’s a bit like signing a veteran player. The team knows the player is not as good as he was, and that he won’t be able to contribute even at his current level for more than another year or so, but having him on the team allows them to have at least acceptable performance in that spot for a little while longer. If ABC brings back Scrubs without Braff, they’ll be able to put off worrying about that time slot, concentrate on the other holes they have to fill (after mistakes like the remake of Cupid, they’ve got plenty), and come back for that slot in a year.

As to whether it helps or hurts Scrubs, the thing is that “going out while you’re on top” is not a luxury most shows have, or want to have. People would rather have jobs than not. (That’s how you get something like The Golden Palace: Bea Arthur wanted to quit while the show was ahead, and could probably afford to leave because she’d starred in two hit shows, but her co-stars and crew wanted to keep on working.) So if the producers have a chance to get another season for Scrubs, they’ll probably want to take it if they can get an acceptable deal. The real question is whether an inherently sub-par season — like the season of That ’70s Show without Topher Grace, or Laverne without Shirley — will hurt the show in reruns. I don’t know if there’s any data on stuff like that, but with no actual facts in front of me, I’d guess that just one season without the star probably won’t hurt them too bad; it’s when you have several sub-par seasons at the end of the run that you might have problems in syndication, because that condemns the syndicators to run several weeks’ worth of episodes that leave you going “who are these people?”

World o' floor-crossers: Collect them all!

By Paul Wells - Tuesday, April 28, 2009 at 5:53 PM - 33 Comments

How about it, Canadians? Who did a right and noble thing? Who betrayed everything they stand for just to be on the winning side? Bonus points for consistency!

Who's Watching The Kids?

By Jaime Weinman - Tuesday, April 28, 2009 at 5:42 PM - 4 Comments

Another space-filling intro from an obscure ’70s show (that apparently got shown on TV Land back when TV Land didn’t suck). Remember Blansky’s Beauties? Well, after that show deservedly flopped, Garry Marshall didn’t give up on the idea of the story of hot showgirls living with Scott Baio. He sold NBC on a new show, loosely based on Blansky with three of the same leads: Caren Kaye, Linda Goodfriend and Scott Baio, and NBC bought it, first titled Legs and then Who’s Watching the Kids? By the time this version of the intro aired, Caren Kaye was off the show. And nobody cared one way or the other, because this version flopped too. However, this series can be thanked for introducing Jim Belushi as a sitcom star. Thank you Garry.

Arlen Specter's defection and the big picture

By Jaime Weinman - Tuesday, April 28, 2009 at 5:11 PM - 11 Comments

The big news out of U.S. politics today is the announcement that Pennsylvania Senator Arlen Specter, elected to the U.S. Senate as a Republican in 1980, will leave the Republicans and run as a Democrat. Specter is doing this because it’s the only way for him to survive politically: he was almost certain to lose a primary challenge by a more conservative Republican. But his defection is further proof that the U.S. political system has changed. It used to be a wild, unpredictable system based more on regional interests than party affiliation. Now it’s something closer to, well, a system like ours.

For many years, the party a U.S. politician belonged to didn’t necessarily define how conservative or liberal his views were. Though the Democratic party was overall the more liberal party, it also included many conservative Democrats, plus what amounted to a sort of party-within-a-party in the form of the Southern “Dixiecrats.” The Republicans incorporated everything from hard-core right-wingers like Joe McCarthy to liberal Republicans from New England. Congressmen and Senators’ voting patterns couldn’t be predicted by checking party registration. And cross-party alliances were common; in the ‘60s, when Lyndon Johnson tried to pass Civil Rights legislation, he depended on a coalition of liberal Democrats and Republicans to pass it over the objections of the segregationist Southern Democrats.

As time went on, the parties started to become more ideologically consistent; Southern conservatives started to move from the Democrats to the Republicans, and New England started voting in more liberal Democrats to replace the old liberal Republicans. There were a few stragglers left, but they were wiped out in two big Congressional landslides: the Republicans took over Congress in 1994 by defeating nearly all the Democrats from conservative districts, and 12 years later the Democrats took back the House and Senate by beating Republicans from liberal areas (including all the remaining Republican Congressmen from New England). Today, even the most conservative Democrats are to the left of the average Republican, and while Specter was considered the most liberal Republican Senator, he was actually to the right of most Democrats: blogger Glenn Greenwald points out that “time and again during the Bush era, Specter stood with Republicans on the most controversial and consequential issues.” The U.S. now has a conservative party and a liberal party, with strict rules for membership.

That explains the fact, which TV pundits frequently bemoan, that there’s no more “bipartisanship” in the U.S. government. “Bipartisanship” was a relic from a time when politicians didn’t always vote along party lines, so they pushed bills through by making deals with other politicians who agreed with them. But now, politicians must vote with their party on just about everything; if they break on even one issue, as Specter did with the Republicans on the stimulus bill, then they’ll get taken down in the primaries. But more importantly, most politicians agree with their party on most issues; that’s why they got the nomination in the first place. The reason Obama’s stimulus package got almost unanimous support from Democrats and opposition from Republicans is that the Democrats agree with Obama and the Republicans don’t. In other words, the U.S. now has what amounts to a Parliamentary democracy, where each party votes along party lines. There’s nothing wrong with that, as Canada, Britain and many other countries can attest. Maybe the U.S. will get used to being more like Canada.

What Canadians think of Sikhs, Jews, Christians, Muslims . . .

By John Geddes - Tuesday, April 28, 2009 at 4:45 PM - 200 Comments

Canadians like to think of their country as a model for the world of how all sorts of people can get along together. But when it comes to the major faiths other than Christianity, a new poll conducted for Maclean’s finds that many Canadians harbour deeply troubling biases. Multiculturalism? Although by now it might seem an ingrained national creed, fewer than one in three Canadians can find it in their hearts to view Islam or Sikhism in a favourable light. Diversity? Canadians may embrace it in theory, but only a minority say they would find it acceptable if one of their kids came home engaged to a Muslim, Hindu or Sikh. Understanding? There’s not enough to prevent media images of war and terrorism from convincing almost half of Canadians that mainstream Islam encourages violence.

The poll, by Angus Reid Strategies, surveyed 1,002 randomly selected Canadians on religion at a moment when issues of identity are a hot topic in Ottawa. Immigration Minister Jason Kenney has led a push by the Conservative government to revamp citizenship law, emphasizing the need for real bonds to Canada, and Kenney is looking for ways to encourage immigrants to integrate faster and more fully into Canadian society. But as federal policy strives to encourage newcomers to put down roots and fit in, the poll highlights an equal need for the Canadian majority to take a hard look at its distorted preconceptions about religious minorities. “It astonishes and saddens me as a Canadian,” said Angus Reid chief research officer Andrew Grenville, who has been probing Canadians’ views on religion for 16 years. “I don’t think the findings reflect well on Canada at all.”

Continue…

What's more—and what's less—popular than the Tories and the Liberals

By Philippe Gohier - Tuesday, April 28, 2009 at 4:25 PM - 4 Comments

According to the latest Angus Reid survey, the Liberals and Conservatives are neck and neck; if an election were held today, the two major parties would each take 33 per cent of the vote, with the NDP coming in a distant third with 15 per cent support and the Greens roughly matching their 2008 election result of six per cent. The Bloc, meanwhile, would take 40 per cent in la belle province.

While neither the Tories or Liberals appear poised to score a Parliamentary majority, they are still more popular than smoking while pregnant and expensive, eco-friendly products. That said, they still have a way to go before they’ve caught up with God and the prospect of eternal life.

Six things that are more popular than the Conservatives and the Liberals:

Frugality: More than 80 per cent of Canadians say they’ve cut back on their spending.

Stimulus spending: 59 per cent of Canadians believe government spending will help Canada’s economy recover.

God: 58 per cent of Canadians say they “definitely believe in God.”

Virginity: 56 per cent of Canadian teens say they’ve never had sex.

Eternal life: 42 per cent of Canadians say that, given the opportunity, they would choose to live forever.

The war in Afghanistan: 40 per cent of Canadians support the military mission.

Six things that are less popular than the Conservatives and the Liberals:

Green products: 29 per cent of Canadian shoppers opt for environmentally-friendly products, even if they’re more expensive than the alternative.

Atheist bus ads: 20 per cent of Canadians want to see a message proclaiming, “There’s probably no God, now stop worrying and enjoy your life” on city buses.

The Canucks’ playoff chances: 18 per cent of Canadians think Vancouver has the best chance of winning the Stanley Cup. (Amazingly, five per cent picked the Leafs.)

Smoking while pregnant: 11 per cent of Canadian women say they lit up during their pregnancy.

Protectionism: 9.7 per cent of Canadians oppose “enhancing the flow of people and goods” across the Canada-U.S. border.

Health care as a top priority: 9.6 per cent of Canadians identify health care as most important issue facing the country.

Broken model

By Robert Kokonis, Takeoffeh.com - Tuesday, April 28, 2009 at 4:24 PM - 1 Comment

In the traditional airline model, premium-class travellers in First and Business Class cabins are the profit drivers. They account for just 10%-20% of passengers on long-haul flights, but generate up to 50% of revenues.

In other words, the folks sipping champagne up front are subsidizing the el Cheapo fares for us saps back in Steerage Class. But what happens when the premium passengers stop showing up? Who will do the heavy lifting?

It looks like we’re about to find out. The global economic meltdown has resulted in a sharp drop in traffic, especially on the premium side. Despite aggressive capacity reductions by the airlines, they have been unable to keep pace with the accelerating fall in demand.

Will airline travel return to an era when it was accessible only by the well-heeled and privileged? That’s doubtful — the rise of the low cost carrier will see to that. And full service carriers will continue efforts to improve competitiveness by further trimming costs. But like it or not, the cost of travel for many of us will inescapably be on the rise.

The depths of the present economic morass demonstrate the frailty of the current airline model. Lose a substantial portion of your premium fare traffic and it doesn’t matter how many Economy seats you fill with cheap fares – you’ll still lose money. Low cost and leisure charter carriers aside, something has to give to ensure mainline carriers live to see another day.

After the early 1990’s recession, many carriers downsized their First cabins or eliminated them in favour of a Business Class alternative. The price was better and the stigma of corporate waste not as visible. In time though, the “new” Business service encroached on traditional First Class standards which, coupled with booming economies, drove the re-emergence of an ultra-luxurious, status driven “new” breed of First Class.

So what will airlines do this time around? In some parts of the world there will continue to be a demand for some level of premium product. For example, of 86 scheduled passenger airlines recently surveyed by AirTrav Inc., 36 (42%) had a long-haul First Class product. Tellingly, 27 of those airlines were based in Asia-Pacific or the Mideast.

For the rest of the world, it’s likely that some carriers will again scale back or eliminate First Class cabins. Business Class cabins will either remain the same size if First Class is eliminated, or be downsized on airlines that had no First cabin.

What will airlines do with the surplus space? They will increase seats in the Economy cabin and an many will roll out a “Premium Economy” service that typically features a separate cabin with upgraded seats and space yet which provides regular Economy meals.

Premium Economy panders to the legions of corporate types and better-off individuals who can afford a little more luxury, but can’t justify Business Class prices due to corporate travel policies and/or budgets.

The introduction of a Premium cabin is an intelligent move for airlines because the incremental revenue earned from passengers who would otherwise sit in Economy should exceed the revenue lost (“yield erosion”) from passengers trading down from Business to Premium Economy.

The bottom line is that a flight must generate a minimum level of revenue to be profitable. The changes described above will not address the total scope of the demand-driven revenue dilemma. Ultimately, back-of-the-bus passengers will have to pay more to offset what may be a longer-term pullback from premium air travel.

Compounding this trend is the prospect of rising fuel surcharges. It is not a question of if oil prices will climb again, but when and how high.

With higher Economy fares and fuel surcharges looming, if you want to fly to London for $199 you’d better book a ticket, because by this time next year you’ll likely be paying a lot more.

By: Robert Kokonis, President & Managing Director, AirTrav Inc.

Photo Credits: Dr. Flash, Raymond Truelove Photography

Neurotic mate is good for women’s health

By macleans.ca - Tuesday, April 28, 2009 at 4:09 PM - 0 Comments

Researchers have known for a while that conscientious people live longer. Now researchers at the University of Illinois are looking at how one’s personality can influence the health of another—and they’ve found that having a conscientious partner is also good for you. The study on conscientious spouses or romantic partners also found that women get an added (though small) health benefit when paired with someone who is conscientious—and neurotic. Although, the when it comes to men, having a neurotic partner does not have the same health benefit.

University of Illinois

Wash it away

By macleans.ca - Tuesday, April 28, 2009 at 4:07 PM - 0 Comments

Children with eczema experienced a dramatic improvement after soaking in a tub full of water and half a cup of household bleach, shows research from Northwestern University. A study showed that just 10 minutes in a bleach bath twice a week was more effective than the usual topical and oral antibiotic treatment, which doctors are reluctant to prescribe for fear of encouraging antibiotic resistance. The bleach works by killing bacteria on the surface of skin that causes eczema. Those children who took bleach baths had a reduction in eczema that was five times greater than those children who took “placebo baths.” In fact, the researchers were so moved by the improvement experienced by the bleach bath group that they cut the study short so that the placebo group could start taking beneficial soaks too.

Science Daily

Bad Idea Jeans: Swine Flu Edition

By Scott Feschuk - Tuesday, April 28, 2009 at 3:22 PM - 4 Comments

So, yeah, I was reluctant at first to kiss that pig full on the mouth. But then I thought to myself: When am I going to be in rural Mexico again?

Mon dieu, they really like him

By Martin Patriquin - Tuesday, April 28, 2009 at 3:15 PM - 8 Comments

He came to Quebec to flog his book, but Michael Ignatieff’s three-day breeze through the province felt a lot like an election campaign. He was on the radio, spinning his yarn about time spent on his uncle’s dairy farm in the Eastern Townships. He was on television, charmingly mangling his French syntax. His word on the bread-and-butter issue of identity—“What I offer to Quebecers is that you can be a proud Quebecer and a proud Canadian in the order you choose”—was an oft-repeated sound bite. “There is a certain curiosity about me here,” he said during one radio appearance.

Curiosity and, so far, approval. The polls have been very kind to Ignatieff since he became Liberal leader in December—particularly in Quebec, where the latest Ekos poll has the Liberals up 13 percentage points since the last federal election, in October. Two prior polls told a similar story: the party, once near death off the island of Montreal thanks largely to the sponsorship scandal and the disastrous reign of Stéphane Dion, has leapfrogged the Conservatives as the federalist party of choice.

Continue…

Sacha Baron Cohen strikes again

By Jaime Weinman - Tuesday, April 28, 2009 at 2:00 PM - 3 Comments

How many different ways are there to annoy people with a silly accent? That’s a question that will soon be answered by Sacha Baron Cohen and Larry Charles, the star and director who gave us Borat and now return with Brüno, the story of a gay, Euro-trashy Austrian fashion expert. Brüno is a character Cohen developed along with Borat on Da Ali G Show; the movie, to be released on July 10, will follow the same format as Borat, a series of loosely connected segments in which Cohen embarrasses real people with his idiotic questions and behaviour. Cohen has found out the hard way that this is the only way he can make a successful movie; in 2002, when he transferred his most popular character to a scripted film, Ali G Indahouse, the result was a financial flop. There’s only one thing his fans want to see him doing: making real people squirm.

Cohen will do anything to get to those uncomfortable moments, like the scenes in Brüno where (in a parody of Madonna and Angelina’s baby-collecting) he adopts an African baby and, in front of shocked onlookers, names him “O.J.” If he risks a lawsuit, that’s just part of what he does. One of the big stories about Borat was that Cohen and the producers were sued all over the U.S. by people who didn’t realize that the movie would portray them negatively. Some plaintiffs claimed they had been defamed; others argued that Cohen had invaded their privacy by putting them on film. The most-publicized challenge came from three frat boys in South Carolina who were paid $200 apiece to appear in the movie and say a few words—which turned out to include comments like “it would be a better country if we had slaves.” One of them told ABC News that the producers “told us a lie” by suggesting that Borat was a real person and that this was a documentary for his native country of Kazakhstan. By the time they knew it wasn’t true, the film was in theatres and everyone was laughing at them.

Continue…

Gregg v. Ignatieff

By Aaron Wherry - Tuesday, April 28, 2009 at 1:48 PM - 13 Comments

Twenty-seven more minutes of conversation. About nine-and-a-half minutes in they move on from True Patriot Love to talking about Ignatieff’s political career. Haven’t got time to watch it all before QP. Will go ahead and assume there are at least half a dozen attack ads in there somewhere.

Sticking with the Tigers

By Michael Petrou - Tuesday, April 28, 2009 at 1:08 PM - 1 Comment

The Canadian Tamil Congress held a press conference today to demand that the Canadian government “take immediate and strong actions against Sri Lanka to prevent a civilian bloodbath.”

Thousands of Tamil civilians remain trapped with a dwindling force of Tamil Tiger rebels along a swampy coastal strip in northern Sri Lanka, where the Sri Lankan army has cornered them. The European Union, among others, has condemned the Tamil Tigers for using the trapped civilians as human shields and forcibly preventing them from leaving the conflict zone.

At the press conference, Balakuma Balasingam, an executive member of the Ottawa chapter of the Canadian Tamil Congress, said the civilians with the Tigers are there by choice and would rather starve under continuous shellfire with the Tigers than cross to government-controlled territory. Tens of thousands of Tamils have fled the Tiger enclave by land and boat. Balasingam said they made  a “momentary decision.” 

No music for you, America!

By macleans.ca - Tuesday, April 28, 2009 at 1:03 PM - 1 Comment

Near the end of a recital at Los Angeles’s Disney Hall, the famous Polish pianist Krystian Zimerman told the audience that this would be his last performance in the U.S., due to his objections to the country’s military policies, including the use of his native Poland for CIA prisons and missile defence systems. “Get your hands off my country,” he said before playing the final piece on his program. A few audience members walked out in protest, but most stayed to listen and applaud.

Los Angeles Times

When is an iPhone not an iPhone?

By macleans.ca - Tuesday, April 28, 2009 at 1:01 PM - 0 Comments

After locking itself into an exclusive U.S. arrangement with carrier AT&T for the iPhone, Apple has reportedly created two “non iPhone” devices for rival carrier Verizon. One is apparently a stripped down version of the iPhone while the other is a multimedia pad. And with Apple in negotiations to extend its lucrative deal with AT&T, talk of a rival firm butting into the Apple phone business could give the tech company plenty of bargaining leverage. For both Verizon and AT&T, the big sticking point is bound to be the ever-expanding apps business. Right now Apple is the exclusive provider and distributor for iPhone apps.  

BusinessWeek

You can still eat bacon

By macleans.ca - Tuesday, April 28, 2009 at 12:59 PM - 1 Comment

Hard hit by the misimpression that swine flu is spread by eating pork, the Canadian pork industry is mounting a PR campaign to try to mitigate the pandemic’s impact, the Canadian Press reports. The health crisis is just the latest blow to a sector that’s been hurt by weaker demand for pork products, reduced exports and higher feed prices. Maple Leaf spokeswoman Linda Smith said the company is supporting the World Organisation for Animal Health’s call to get rid of the “swine flu” name:  “as it hasn’t been isolated in animals and is not related to pork products,” she says. Paul Hodgman, executive director of Alberta Pork, says the situation has never been as bleak: “We’ve never had a period this bad for this long in the history of the pork industry in Canada.”

The Canadian Press

Atwood’s Payback: the movie

By macleans.ca - Tuesday, April 28, 2009 at 12:56 PM - 0 Comments

Margaret Atwood’s unlikely late-career metamorphosis from award-winning novelist to economics guru continues apace. Now the National Film Board of Canada announces it’s making a documentary based on her uncannily timed non-fiction book Payback: Debt and the Shadow Side of Wealth. Published last fall, just as world financial markets plummeted into crisis, Atwood’s witty account of the history of borrowing and lending was lauded from London (the Economist loved it) to Manhattan (so did the New York Review of Books). But does the subject lend itself to film? Jennifer Baichwal, who is signed on to direct, claims Payback is “brimming with cinematic possibilities.”

Screen Daily

The Canadian Press

Carla Bruni’s Spanish competition

By macleans.ca - Tuesday, April 28, 2009 at 12:27 PM - 0 Comments

After a year as Europe’s undisputed first lady of fashion, Carla Bruni has faced some stiff competition of late. First there was Michelle Obama, who won standing ovations on her recent trip across the Atlantic from fashionistas for her fresh mix of chain-store sweaters and designer dresses. When both first ladies were side by side, Bruni, a former model and now the wife of French President Nicolas Sarkozy, looked downright dowdy. Now on a trip to Spain, Bruni’s up against gorgeous Crown Princess Letizia and the comparisons aren’t flattering. Is it time for Bruni to rethink her demure-but-couture clothes strategy?
Daily Mail