A Peeps-show in time for Easter

By macleans.ca - Tuesday, March 30, 2010 at 12:23 PM - 0 Comments

Every year the Washington Post is inundated with entries to its annual Peep diorama contest. While the marshmallow confections—usually in the form of pastel-coloured chicks and bunnies—are much more popular south of the border, everyone can enjoy the cleverness that went into changing Peeps into everything from a scene from the children’s book Madeleine, in which the “two straight lines” of girls is replaced with yellow chicks, to Chinese terracotta statues. The entries come complete with punny titles such as “Super Peeplo Brothers” for a riff on the video game Super Mario Brothers. The newspaper has not only a story and a photo gallery of the best entries, but fabulous videos showing every detail of the five best dioramas. Enjoy.

Washington Post

The unlikely benefits of Easter eggs

By macleans.ca - Tuesday, March 30, 2010 at 12:15 PM - 0 Comments

With the Easter season in full swing, it’s tough to resist indulging in the chocolate eggs, bunnies and bars that line store shelves. And according to a recent study, it’s okay to give in—as long as it’s just for a taste. In fact, a recent study published in the European Heart Journal found that consuming small amounts of chocolate can actually lower blood pressure, and decrease the risk of strokes and heart attacks. To test the benefits, researchers from the German Institute of Human Nutrition, Nuthetal, looked at the chocolate consumption of 19,000 people over eight years. They attribute the effects to the flavanols in cocoa. So where should chocolate lovers draw the line? According to the study’s fine-print, says Victoria Taylor, Senior Heart Health Dietician, at the British Heart Foundation, the benefits were derived from eating “about one square of chocolate a day or half a small chocolate Easter egg in a week.”

BBC

NASA to look into Toyota’s problems

By macleans.ca - Tuesday, March 30, 2010 at 12:09 PM - 1 Comment

U.S. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood has announced that the NASA space and aeronautics agency will help analyze Toyota’s electronic throttles to see if they’re to blame for incidents of unintended acceleration, Reuters reports. In addition, experts from the National Academy of Sciences will study unintended acceleration across the auto industry after the issue was raised by congressional lawmakers at the Toyota hearings. While the Transportation Department’s National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) is just starting to look into Toyota, the government and Toyota both blame mechanical and equipment flaws after 8.5 million Toyota and Lexus vehicles were recalled due to unintended acceleration in the last six months.

Reuters

Scientists modify morality with magnets

By macleans.ca - Tuesday, March 30, 2010 at 12:04 PM - 4 Comments

Scientists have demonstrated they are able to alter people’s moral judgment by using magnetic pulses on a certain part of the brain, the BBC reports. The team has identified a part of the brain, just above the right ear, which appears to affect morality. In a study of 20 volunteers, the team from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology used magnetic pulses on cell activity in this region to impair their notion of right and wrong. In one test, subjects were exposed to transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) for 25 minutes before reading stories involving morally questionable characters they were then asked to judge; in a second, they were subjected to a short TMS burst while being asked to make a judgment. In both cases, the team found that morally dubious acts with a “happy” ending were more often deemed acceptable.

BBC News

Who owns your genome?

By macleans.ca - Tuesday, March 30, 2010 at 11:55 AM - 0 Comments

The human genome is vast, consisting of tens of thousands of protein-coating genes. But did you know that 20 per cent of those genes have been patented by multibillion-dollar corporations? That might soon change. On Monday, a U.S. federal judge threw out patents on two genes linked to ovarian and breast cancer. If the decision is upheld, say many, it could spur a massive overhaul of intellectual property law—bringing thousands of existing patents on human genes under scrutiny. Judge Sweet argued that the two patents in question were “improperly granted” because they dealt with a “law of nature.” The American Civil Libertiecs Union has joined together with lawyers, patients and medical organizations to fight to patents; they argue that since genes are products of nature, they cannot be patented by industry. Critics, however, say patents are necessary to encourage genetic research.

New York Times

They're turning on themselves!

By Andrew Potter - Tuesday, March 30, 2010 at 11:31 AM - 12 Comments

The car manufacturers, silly. Who did you think I was referring to? Check out this billboard I saw in Toronto yesterday:

I’m not much of a car guy, and it never occurred to me that the Chevy Malibu is in the same category as a Honda Accord (to me, the Accord says “successful bureaucrat”, while the Malibu says “airport rental”). This isn’t exactly an attack ad, it’s more of a contrastive spot.  But most contrastive car ads (indeed, most contrastive ads in the consumer marketplace in general) refer to “the other leading brand” or somesuch, which is why it is interesting to see one car company going directly after another company’s model.

Unlike politics, negative campaigning is relatively uncommon in the shopping mall. There are lots of possible explanations for this, but I think one major reason is that because the size of the stakes in the political marketplace is fixed (there is a fixed amount of power to go around), politics is a zero sum game. The consumer market, on the other hand, can grow, and one company’s success does not necessarily come at the expense of a competitor (think of what Starbucks did for the coffee market, or Red Bull for energy drinks). Attack ads in these markets risk turning customers off the entire category.

Which might help explain why car companies are now going after one another: The market is not growing nearly as fast as it needs to for all to thrive, it is something like a zero-sum market now. So Chevy is going after Honda, Chevy goes after Ford, and everyone is going after Toyota.

I’m all for duking it out over brand identies. But if were in the car biz, I’d be really wary about going after another company over recalls and other safety issues. Recalls, after all, are as American as the 5000-calorie bacon burger, and what goes around will assuredly come around. Besides, it is increasingly obvious that there is nothing particularly wrong with Toyota’s cars. I doubt Toyota will forget how they’ve been hung out to dry by the industry.

Ricky Martin is out of the closet

By macleans.ca - Tuesday, March 30, 2010 at 11:26 AM - 3 Comments

Is it still news if everybody already knows? Apparently. Former music superstar Ricky Martin (remember him? What about Menudo?) has come out of the closet. After years of sometimes coy denials, Martin posted a statement on his website yesterday. “I am proud to say that I am a fortunate homosexual man. I am very blessed to be who I am.” Martin explains that his two adopted sons inspired him to go public. And there’s also the memoir he’s writing…”These years in silence and reflection made me stronger and reminded me that acceptance has to come from within and that this kind of truth gives me the power to conquer emotions I didn’t even know existed,” writes Martin. Larry King is on line one.

Ricky Martin Music

Stop eating meat? Not bloody likely.

By Peter Shawn Taylor - Tuesday, March 30, 2010 at 11:04 AM - 24 Comments

A lot of ill has been laid at the hoof of the meat industry. As the Maclean’s investigation into the meatless movement explains this growing phenomenon has been largely driven by complaints from the activists upset by the environmental, health and moral implications of eating animal protein.

Given the mountain of evidence mustered against meat-eating, it might seem as if it’s an activity soon to go the way of the roasted passenger pigeon. And yet, claims that human carnivorism is set to become extinct seem foolish and implausible. Meat eating may have its challenges—as Maclean’s writers Katie Engelhart and Nicholas Köhler point out in considerable detail—but it finds its roots deep in human nature. And that’s not likely to change any time soon.

RELATED ARTICLES
Save the planet: Stop eating meat —The UN says so, and so do a growing list of school boards. Meet the new eco enemy.
Where’s the beef? — Scientist takes a second look at UN numbers that have led many environmentalists to forego meat
Stop eating meat: the recipes — Going flexitarian? Just veggie-curious? Here are some meatless dishes worth trying.

To begin, it is a physiological fact that humans have evolved to eat meat as well as vegetables. We are by nature omnivores. Our stomachs, for instance, produce large quantities of enzymes specifically designed to break down meat. And while human incisors may be of little use in killing prey, we notably lack the ability to ruminate. We are designed to eat a variety of foods.

Meat is a necessary component of the global diet, comprising approximately one-third of all protein consumed. Without meat on the plate, it would be impossible to compensate for all that missing nutrition. Meat is also a vitally important supply of micronutrients. This is particularly so in less-developed countries. Adding even small amounts of meat to the diet of those who are malnourished can provide a tremendous health benefit.

Finally and perhaps most importantly, meat is the ultimate consumer good. Throughout time it has been intricately linked to growing incomes and stability.

While meat consumption has been relatively flat throughout the developed world, a growing middle class in developing countries has led to tremendous increases in global meat demand. The doubling of meat consumption in China over the past 15 years is a clear example of the basic human desire to update one’s diet at income rises. As economic circumstances improve, this trend will only continue. An International Food Policy Research Institute report on the explosive growth in demand for meat and milk products noted: “Whether it is a good thing is not the issue; it is a phenomenon that will occur.”

And despite the gloom of anti-meat crusaders, meat does have its benefits. “Livestock’s Long Shadow,” the report cited by Sir Paul McCartney as proof of the evils of meat, provides ample evidence of the advantages associated with meat production. It notes, for instance, that nearly one billion poor farmers earn their income by raising livestock. “It is often the only economic activity available to poor people in developing countries,” says the study from the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) of the United Nations. It also allows for food production on otherwise marginal land.

Finally, given that meat consumption is so strongly associated with growing incomes and wealth, there is room for considerable optimism that the admittedly real and, in some cases, pressing problems associated with producing meat can be solved through appropriate pricing and incentives. If people are prepared to pay more for meat—and this has been the case for centuries—then the important issues of water-use, feed, land and waste will ultimately find a solution. This is in fact the conclusion of the FAO report that so concerns McCartney.

Eating meat is an essential and established part of human physiology, human nature and human history. It is not going to drop off the menu any time soon.

Stop eating meat: the recipes

By Katie Engelhart - Tuesday, March 30, 2010 at 11:04 AM - 4 Comments

You read our piece, “Save the Planet: Eat Less Meat.” So now you know: today, a war on meat is underway—a war waged not by doctors or animal rights activists, but by environmentalists who are primarily preoccupied with the health of our planet.

And now you’re looking around. Maybe the idea of eschewing meat for one day each week tickled your fancy. Maybe you want to go further, branching into the realm of the flexitarian. Or, maybe you’re just veggie-curious—still mulling over the ideas behind the moderate meat movements.

RELATED ARTICLES
Save the planet: Stop eating meat — The UN says so, and so do a growing list of school boards. Meet the new eco enemy.
Stop eating meat? Not bloody likely. — Just how successful can this meatless movement be?
Where’s the beef? — Scientist takes a second look at UN numbers that have led many environmentalists to forego meat

To help you out, Maclean’s has cast far and wide for delicious and nutritious meat-free recipes. Some of these suggestions come from the cooks and nutritionists you read about in our piece. Others are personal favourites. But each of the recipes describes a simple-to-make, protein-rich, main course meal that we think could make converts out of even the most tofuphobic.

BEANS:

When you think vegetarian and beans, you probably think burger. And for good reason! Veggie burgers are cheap and cheerful ways to get full—whether you use lentils, chickpeas, or spicy black beans.

But there’s plenty of other ways to make beans a dinner table staple. One of my favourite legumes is the chickpea. And one of my favourite things to do with chickpeas is turn them into a casserole. This Eggplant, Tomato and Chickpea Casserole comes from Martha Rose Shulman, the New York Times’s fabulous, mostly-vegetarian food writer. With a hint of cinnamon for some Middle Eastern flair, this makes a cozy-warm casserole that, most conveniently, keeps for days in the fridge without spoiling.

My second favourite thing to do with a chickpea? Toss on the curry powder! This Sweet Potato Curry comes from Canadian chef Anna Olsen. As a plus, this one is made with yogurt, for extra protein. (Hint: Microwave the sweet potato cubes for just a few minutes to soften before continuing on with the instructions.)

Not beaned out yet? Get creative. Jamie Oliver uses beans in his mexican wraps. Dawn Jackson Blatner (Remember her? She helped coin the term flexitarian) stuffs molasses beans and greens inside of sweet potatoes. And the folks at Planet Forward have come up with a mean lentil-based sloppy joe.

QUINOA

What!?

I’ll hold your hand on this one. For starters, it’s pronounced key-nwa. And while it looks a lot like a grain, it’s actually a chenopod, like beets and spinach. Quinoa is a staple dish in many regions of South America. (The Incas apparently called in the “mother of all grains.”) Today, it remains popular because, unlike rice and wheat, quinoa is a complete protein. In other words, it contains all the essential amino acids that humans need.

That said, it’s a bit of an acquired taste. So here’s what I recommend if you haven’t had it before: drench it in peanut sauce! It’s a baby step into the quinoa world. And hey, what doesn’t taste good with peanut butter? Here is a simple Peanut Sauce Vegetable Stir Fry with Tofu. When I make this, I forget the tofu entirely.

Once you’re used to it, try this Quinoa, Butternut Squash and Pumpkin Seed Salad. The maple syrup in the sauce gives it a light, sweet taste. And the raisins and pumpkin seeds mixed in give it lots of texture. I even throw feta in when I’ve got some on hand. (Hint: microwave the squash for a few minutes before sautéing.)

Quinoa is also great as a risotto. Try this Quinoa Risotto with Arugula and Parmesan (from, of all places, the Mayo Clinic’s website).

SOY BEANS:

It seems everyone has a love-hate relationships with soybeans. While there are hoards of soy-crazed vegetarians out there, there are also a lot of people who see the soybean as a nutritional anti-Christ. I’ll let you decide for yourself. (Hey, I’m a journalist, not a doctor). In any event, here are some good ones:

Edamame

Plain soy beans (or, edamame) can be used almost everywhere. Here, they are mixed with chickpeas to make a more protein-rich hummus. Here, they are combined with corn and tomatoes to make a satisfying salad:

Tofu

When you process soy beans, you get tofu. (Don’t make that face!)

I know: only the very resilient enjoy the taste of plain tofu. But the rest of us can still take advantage of tofu’s great ability to soak up whatever spices it’s cooked with. Typically, you find tofu in a stir fry. I like this Spinach, Tofu and Sesame Stir-Fry because it’s got lots of green stuff in it and the sesame seeds add a nice crunch. Recently, I stumbled on this Baked Tofu with Tahini recipe, which really shook up everything I thought a new about the stuff.

Tempeh

This is what you get when you ferment soybeans. It sounds frightening, but really—when cooked the right way—tempeh has a rich, nutty taste that many find preferable to tofu.

Once you get used to it, marinated tofu works well in a sandwich. Here’s tempeh pretending to be bacon in a “TLT” with avocado. Here’s tempeh pretending to be beef in a Tempeh Bourgignon. And here’s Tempeh doing more pretending in a Jamaican Jerk Tempeh dish.

GRAINS:

There’s a whole wide world of grains that are here to help keep your meat-free plates interesting. One of my go-to grains has always been barley. This chilled Barley Salad with Tomato and Corn has just enough Parmesan to give it a meaty, savoury flavour. And I love the tahini-herb sauce coating this Bulgur Lentil Pilaf. (Although I must admit that this one is unabashedly ‘healthy’ tasting.) But remember that you don’t have to stick with the tomato and parsley toppings that are recommended; it’s easy to throw any veg on top of a big bowl of saucy grains.

If you’re feeling a bit lazy – this Creole Vegetable Jambalaya from Emeril Lagasse, which features eggplant and yellow squash, is just about the easiest thing to throw together. Just put it all in a big pot and simmer!

NOODLES

You already know how to cook pasta, but you have tried soba noodles? These Japanese noodles are made from buckwheat – which, despite the name, is not related to wheat at all.  Health nuts like it because it has a lot of essential amino acids and is also high in protein. Soba noodles are great in Thai-inspired dishes like this Buckwheat Noodle Salad, made with mango and peanuts. Or, Japanese-inspired dishes, like these spicy soba noodles tossed with soy sauce and shiitake mushrooms.  But they can also be prepared just like traditional pasta. Here, these garlicky soba noodles are covered with Parmesan cheese.

EGGS, NUTS

Sometimes meatless eating is easy. We eat a lot of egg and nuts anyway. So why not stretch them out into a full meal?

Eggs

Martha Stewart has a really fun Family-Style Rolled Omelet with Spinach and Cheddar. (I didn’t even know that Omelets could be rolled this way. But hey, that’s why she’s Martha Stewart.) When low on time, it’s also easy to whip up a simple breakfast burrito around supper time.

Nuts

Making nuts the star of the meal takes a bit more creativity. This Salad of Wild Rice, Charred Sweet Corn, Spiced Pecans, Avocado and Feta—from Paul McCartney’s Meat Free Mondays website—has enough components in it to fill anyone up. And there’s nothing like a whack of peanut butter to make a stew feel substantial. This West African Groundnut Stew is from the Moosewood Restaurant, one of the historic birthplaces of fine vegetarian dining.

Where's the beef?

By Nicholas Köhler - Tuesday, March 30, 2010 at 10:59 AM - 9 Comments

For those advocating for urgent action on the climate change file, it’s been a rough few months.

From the “Climategate” email scandal at the University of East Anglia to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report’s now-debunked claim that Himalayan glaciers could melt by 2035, advocates have been hit by a series of damaging credibility gaps.

Now the latest: the notion, trumpeted by environmentalists and animal rights crusaders in Europe and in North America, that reducing our consumption of meat will help keep the planet cool.

The idea derives much of its scientific heft from a claim put forward by “Livestock’s Long Shadow,” a United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization report from 2006. “The livestock sector is a major player [in anthropogenic climate change], responsible for 18 per cent of greenhouse gas emissions measured in CO2 equivalent,” the report states in its executive summary. “This is a higher share than transport.”

RELATED ARTICLES
Save the planet: Stop eating meat —The UN says so, and so do a growing list of school boards. Meet the new eco enemy.
Stop eating meat? Not bloody likely. — Just how successful can this meatless movement be?
Stop eating meat: the recipes — Going flexitarian? Just veggie-curious? Here are some meatless dishes worth trying.

Burgers outstripping Hummers in an FAO account of our environmental sins? Powerful stuff. Indeed, the claim, as University of California, Davis animal science researcher Frank Mitloehner points out, has had a major influence on public policy initiatives in the U.S. and Europe since its release (as Maclean’s reported last week in a story examining the growing movement to moderate meat consumption for environmental reasons).

“There are hundreds of hospitals and universities and schools that have taken meat and other animal protein products out of their diets for certain days a week in order to protect the climate,” says Mitloehner, referring to Meatless Monday initiatives that have sprung up worldwide.

Even former Beatle and renowned vegetarian Sir Paul McCartney has latched on to the number with his Meat Free Mondays drive, declaring: “Less meat = less heat.”

Too bad the FAO statement may well be wrong.

According to a report Mitloehner wrote with his UC Davis colleagues Maurice Pitesky and Kimberly Stackhouse, “Livestock’s Long Shadow” arrives at the “18 per cent” slice of emissions attributable to livestock by employing two very different kinds of numbers—the “life cycle” emissions associated with livestock (a cradle-to-grave examination of the industry that takes into account everything from the fertilizer used in growing feed to the methane burps of cattle) and the direct emissions of the transportation industry as calculated by the IPCC (i.e., the burning of fossil fuels as independent from everything else, including extracting the oil from the ground, manufacturing the cars, etc.).

It’s a criticism that has since been accepted by the FAO: “I must say honestly that he has a point,” the agency’s livestock policy officer, Pierre Gerber, told the BBC. “We factored in everything for meat emissions, and we didn’t do the same thing with transport.” He added, however, that “on the rest of the report, I don’t think it was really challenged.”

So what are the worldwide numbers, really? “I am skeptical that anybody knows,” says Mitloehner, whose report, “Clearing the Air: Livestock’s Contributions to Climate Change,” was published in October.

Indeed, the FAO’s 18 per cent figure has had a distorting effect. Based on Environmental Protection Agency figures, livestock accounts for just 3 per cent of anthropogenic greenhouse gases in the U.S., compared to 26 per cent from the U.S. transportation industry. In developing countries like Paraguay, meanwhile, where the livestock sector is much larger in comparison to transportation than in the U.S., meat production would likely total more than 50 per cent of greenhouse gas emissions.

“In the U.S., the 18 per cent number for livestock would be six times too high and in Paraguay two times too low,” says Mitloehner. “But who knows what the numbers look like globally? I don’t.” Though he praises much of the FAO’s work in examining the emissions associated with food production (a more comprehensive FAO analysis is due out later this year), Mitloehner argues the focus on reducing meat consumption is a dead end, one that distracts us from more significant sources of greenhouse gases (like that Hummer) and which may deprive hungry people in developing countries of a crucial food source—meat. He also believes more intensive livestock farming—more animals on less land—can reduce meat’s relatively small footprint even further, particularly in the developing world. (Mitloehner is transparent about funding he has received from organizations bankrolled by the beef industry, but downplays its importance, calling one industry source “such a small percentage that it is inconsequential.”)

Proponents of moderate meat aren’t much swayed by the critique. Nathan Pelletier, an ecological economist at Dalhousie University, notes “Livestock’s Long Shadow” isn’t the only report linking meat production and greenhouse gases. “It would certainly be disingenuous to hold up [the report] as a lonely example of researchers calling attention to the role of the livestock industry in climate change.”

This just in: nothing has changed

By Aaron Wherry - Tuesday, March 30, 2010 at 10:42 AM - 4 Comments

At least since the Defence Minister and Prime Minister’s press secretary mused last October about some amount of soldiers remaining in Afghanistan, the government has been fairly steadfast in its stance that no soldiers will remain in Afghanistan after 2011.

Asked about the matter, a few days after his press secretary’s comments, the Prime Minister promised a “civilian, development, humanitarian mission.” In January, he said “we will not be undertaking any activities that require any kind of military presence, other than the odd guard guarding an embassy.” Last week, in regards to the military mission, Foreign Affairs Minister Lawrence Cannon said “in 2011, we will no longer be there.”

Last night’s reaction to Ms. Clinton’s remarks and this morning’s official response should perhaps not come then as any surprise.

Mailbag: The NDP, making out with Ann Coulter and how I was killed by Jim Flaherty

By Scott Feschuk - Tuesday, March 30, 2010 at 10:33 AM - 14 Comments

Welcome to last Wednesday’s mailbag on this Tuesday, where work, travel and illness conspired to prevent me from promptly answering your thoughtful and pressing queries. These same factors also kept me from following the weekend’s Great Liberal Chin Stroking, so I guess they had their upside. Thanks, horrible infection!

All the following queries were actually submitted by actual readers. And remember – there are no stupid questions, unless you’re asking whether there’s any simpler way to attract hundreds of comments to a blog than by writing a blog entry about commenters.

•••

Dear Scott:

Ann Coulter says that she is a victim of hate speech as a member of an identifiable group: “conservatives.” How can one identify a “conservative” in Canada? Where can I get a guide to help with “conservative” identification in the field? Are they an endangered species as Andrew Coyne claims, or an invasive species, as Paul Wells claims? – A_logician

A_logician –

A terrestrial, day-active animal with sketchy taste in footwear, the conservative hibernates in snowy climes.

There was a time when conservative thoughts and the busy conservatives who think them had almost disappeared from Canada because of over-thinking. But the conservative, who will always be associated with Canada’s early days, has been reintroduced into many areas, and it’s made a successful comeback.

The conservative builds societies defined by the vilification of collective effort because he advocates a rigid, me-first ideology – and also because he has no friends.

With all the fear-mongering the conservative needs to do, it’s fortunate his sense of his own righteousness and self-worth never stops growing.

For a more complete story of the conservative, why not contact the Canadian wildlife service in Ottawa.

•••

Dear Scott:

Let’s say you’re bed ridden with some horrible affliction. You need to send someone out to get meds for you. Unfortunately, it’s a bit complicated. Said person has to know Continue…

'There will occasionally be inconsistencies'

By Aaron Wherry - Tuesday, March 30, 2010 at 10:11 AM - 3 Comments

The Justice Minister dismissed yesterday a Liberal question on the latest redaction mystery, but when the Bloc’s Christiane Gagnon asked about the matter, he managed a concession of sorts.

Mr. Speaker, the government has made a large number of documents available, most recently this past Thursday. The documents were disclosed for different purposes over an extended period of time. Despite the best efforts of those involved, there will occasionally be inconsistencies. However, we addressed those, and are taking it one step further with the appointment of Mr. Justice Iacobucci.

Save the planet: Stop eating meat

By Katie Engelhart and Nicholas Köhler - Tuesday, March 30, 2010 at 9:00 AM - 88 Comments

Photograph by Mike Kemp/Getty Images

One drizzly Thursday last May, the townsfolk of Ghent, a Flemish burg of some 250,000 souls famous for its stoverij—a stew of beef braised in beer—gathered outside a centuries-old slaughterhouse in the town’s historic core to sample soy fritters, pick up a map of local vegetarian eateries, and to watch as a boy in a banana costume did valiant battle against another dressed as a beefsteak. This was Ghent’s inaugural Donderdag Veggiedag—Thursday Veggieday, literally—a weekly holiday from the evils of beef, fish, pork and poultry introduced last year by city council, which declared that the moratorium on animal protein would be “good for the climate, your health and your taste buds.” Said a representative of the Ethical Vegetarian Alternative, Belgium’s largest vegetarian organization and a partner in the city initiative: “If everyone in Flanders does not eat meat one day a week, we will save as much CO2 in a year as taking half a million cars off the road.”

Though meatlessness in Ghent each Thursday is encouraged rather than required, the policy has made vegetarianism pervasive: 95 per cent of the city’s children at 35 local schools, as well as the city’s elected councillors and civil servants, now submit to the Veggiedag menu each week. One poster promoting the policy depicts a polar bear adrift on a shrunken hunk of ice declaring with relief: “Oef! It’s Thursday.”

RELATED ARTICLES
Where’s the beef? — Scientist takes a second look at UN numbers that have led many environmentalists to forego meat
Stop eating meat? Not bloody likely. — Just how successful can this meatless movement be?
Stop eating meat: the recipes — Going flexitarian? Just veggie-curious? Here are some meatless dishes worth trying.

Donderdag Veggiedag was a global first, putting medieval Ghent on the cutting edge of efforts to combat climate change by changing the way people eat. But elsewhere, too, the moderate meat movement is gaining ground. A Meatless Mondays organization founded in the U.S. has now opened branches in Holland, Finland, Canada, Taiwan and Australia. Following Ghent’s lead, cities like São Paulo and Tel Aviv have created city-wide schemes. Last year, Baltimore became the first city in North America to mandate Meatless Mondays in its school cafeterias, for environmental as well as health reasons. A similar proposal has just been made for New York City schools.

Continue…

What the heck

By Paul Wells - Monday, March 29, 2010 at 11:11 PM - 53 Comments

Since Andrew Coyne wrote this post about the subsidy Horse-Canada receives, and since he carries a title which suggests he holds editorial responsibility at a magazine that receives subsidies orders of magnitude larger than the Horse-Canada subsidy, I do wonder how, in good conscience, he could have failed to address the question of the Maclean’s subsidy squarely.

I’m pretty sure I know Andrew’s position on the matter. But in this context, nobody should have to guess at it.

The Commons: Smirking towards the future

By Aaron Wherry - Monday, March 29, 2010 at 6:16 PM - 58 Comments

The Scene. John Baird could barely contain his glee. Over the weekend, in response to the Liberal gathering in Montreal, the Transport Minister had apparently convened his own conference aimed at deciding on the absolute right joke to deliver Monday afternoon. Over two days at some undisclosed location, great minds of stand-up and clowning dealt frankly and, at times, contentiously with the concepts of sarcasm, pun, slapstick and mockery. Various one-liners were proposed, debated and amended. For awhile the conference nearly broke up over a proposal that Mr. Baird merely hand Michael Ignatieff one of those cans that, when opened, sprays a number of cloth snakes. But finally, in the wee hours of Sunday night, a consensus was achieved. And so here, just after 2:15pm today, Mr. Baird stood to reveal what had been accomplished.

“Mr. Speaker,” he said, struggling to withhold a smile, “the Liberal Party certainly had a taxing weekend.”

The very foundation of the House seemed to buckle under the weight of such wit. Continue…

A teachable moment

By Aaron Wherry - Monday, March 29, 2010 at 5:54 PM - 16 Comments

Asked about the matter in Question Period this afternoon, Diane Finley explains her office’s commitment to transparency and clarity in all things.

Mr. Speaker, the reporter was provided with the information that he requested once the campaign was complete and all the costs were in and accurate. We do strive always to be open and transparent, and we certainly are doing our processes to ensure that Canadians do receive the information they ask for in a timely way and that that information is both accurate and complete. We will be taking a look at this example and taking it into consideration to see how we can improve our processes in the future.

U.S. wants Canada to stay in Afghanistan

By macleans.ca - Monday, March 29, 2010 at 5:52 PM - 8 Comments

“We would obviously like to see some form of support continue, because the Canadian Forces have a great reputation, they work really well with our American troops and the other members of our coalition,” said U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton in an interview on CTV’s Power Play. “Obviously it’s up for Canada to decide the way forward, but we certainly hope there will be some continuing connection and visible support because we’ve all learned so much.” Clinton did not say, however, whether a formal request to extend the mission would be made to the Canadian government, but did speculate on the nature of the involvement: “There’s all kinds of things that are possible. The military could slip more into a training role than into a combat role.” Last week, Foreign Affairs Minister Lawrence Cannon confirmed that Canada’s combat role in Afghanistan will end in 2011. “Our military mission will end in 2011 as we’ve indicated in the speech from the throne,” he told the House of Commons.

CTV News

Horse-Something

By Andrew Coyne - Monday, March 29, 2010 at 5:36 PM - 66 Comments

Sigh.

The Government of Canada Invests in Horse-Canada Magazine

AURORA, ONTARIO – On behalf of the Honourable James Moore, Minister of Canadian Heritage and Official Languages, Lois Brown, Member of Parliament (Newmarket–Aurora) today announced funding for Horse-Canada magazine.

Horse-Canada magazine celebrates the joy of owning and caring for horses by contributing to the improvement of horse care and horse management in Canada. The magazine is published five times a year and is distributed across the country. The funds will contribute to the creation of Horse-Canada magazine’s content through Canadian writing, designing, editing, and photography services.

“Our Government is proud to help magazines that speak to Canadians’ interests and passions,” said Minister Moore. “Horse-Canada magazine is an excellent source of information for horse-lovers throughout Canada.”

“I am proud to recognize Canadian Horse Publications as a superb example of a Canadian publisher that produces many high-quality publications serving Canada’s large equestrian industry and enthusiast population,” said Ms. Brown.

“We’re very pleased to receive financial support from the Government of Canada in recognition of Horse Publications Group’s commitment to producing top-class magazines by and for Canadians,” said Jennifer Anstey, Publisher.

[h/t Eye on the Hill - Feds invest in Horse-Canada Magazine]

So the people who don’t read Horse-Canada, which would be almost everyone, will pay to produce five issues a year of Horse-Canada so that the people who do read Horse-Canada don’t have to. This achieves the important public policy goal of … diddlysquat. The people who don’t read Horse Canada get no benefit because others do. The people who do read Horse-Canada are perfectly capable of paying for it themselves. There is no public good argument for subsidy. (Oh, I know: We’re telling ourselves our own stories. About horses.)

Repeat this exercise hundreds of thousands of times and you have the Public Accounts of Canada. Now repeat several hundred thousand more times for the provinces. And again for the municipalities — three levels of government furiously passing money from one group of taxpayers to another and back again, at all points pretending that the money does not come from taxpayers, but from themselves (“The Government of Canada invests in…”)

This particular installment is brought to you by three things:

1) The willingness of publishers such as Jennifer Anstey to take other people’s money — and to say nice things about the government that gave it to her.

2) The willingness of MPs like Lois Brown to take part in this charade, rather than to do her job as a Member of Parliament — as a watchdog on government spending, not a distributor of it — which is precisely to blow the whistle on this kind of thing.

3) The utter shamelessness of ministers like James Moore, who make their living dishing out money that isn’t theirs to people who aren’t entitled to it, in return for thanks they don’t deserve.

A sad day for fans of Michael Ignatieff caricatures

By Aaron Wherry - Monday, March 29, 2010 at 5:01 PM - 13 Comments

As of April 1, MPs will have to restrict their junk mail to their own constituents.

iFlop? Not likely

By macleans.ca - Monday, March 29, 2010 at 4:36 PM - 2 Comments

Ever since Steve Jobs unveiled Apple’s impossibly hyped iPad, frequently maligned as the giant iPhone you never thought you wanted, observers have wondered whether it would catch on, and with who. Well, try most people with $500 to spare (the going rate in the U.S. for the lower rung WiFi-equipped machines). With the devices due to hit stores in the U.S. on April 3, Katy Huberty, an analyst at Morgan Stanley, projects Apple will sell some 10 million iPads by the end of December, doubling the estimates she made earlier this year.

Telegraph

Conservative aide kept public information private

By macleans.ca - Monday, March 29, 2010 at 3:49 PM - 1 Comment

As the saying goes, eventually, the truth always comes out. And when it does, it’s those who tried to suppress it who often find themselves under scrutiny. Such is the case for ministerial aide Ryan Sparrow, who tried to stop bureaucrats from responding to a media request for information. The difficulty began on Feb. 25, when the Globe and Mail submitted a request to the Human Resources Department, seeking to know how much had been spent on a TV advertising campaign that aired during the Olympics. Although bureaucrats quickly came up with the answer—the total TV media buy was about $4,500,000; the net cost of the Olympics package nearly $1,850,000—Sparrow instructed officials not to release any monetary value. According to emails obtained through an Access To Information request, Sparrow advised, without punctuation: “Hold to clarify my amended response is the one I want used no figures.”

Globe and Mail

Won't somebody think of the children?

By macleans.ca - Monday, March 29, 2010 at 3:37 PM - 0 Comments

U.S. President Barack Obama signed his country’s new health care law into effect just days ago. “Starting this year,” Obama explained to a rowdy crowd in Northern Virginia last week, “insurance companies will be banned forever from denying coverage to children with pre-existing conditions.” Well, sort of. “If you have a sick kid,” argues Karen L. Pollitz, a researcher at Georgetown University’s Health Policy Institute, “the individual insurance market will continue to be a scary place.” This week, insurance companies have struck back, arguing that the language of the law does not require them to write insurance for children with pre-existing conditions until 2014. Said Democratic Representative Henry Waxman of California: “The concept that insurance companies would even seek to deny children coverage exemplifies why we fought for this reform.”

New York Times

Who wants a pint of F—cking Hell?

By macleans.ca - Monday, March 29, 2010 at 3:22 PM - 2 Comments

A German firm has been granted the right to brew beer under the name F—cking Hell. While in English the term is an expletive, in German it refers to a light ale (known as Hell in southern Germany and Austria) from the village of Fucking in Austria. The permission, granted by the European Union’s trademarks authority, extends into branded clothing. The EU office said that “F–cking Hell” was an “an interjection used to express a deprecation, but it does not indicate against whom the deprecation is directed. Nor can it be considered as reprehensible to use existing place names in a targeted manner (as a reference to the place), merely because this may have an ambiguous meaning in other languages.” There might be a long wait, however, for the brew with the naughty name. Fucking doesn’t have a brewery and the town’s mayor isn’t aware of any plans to build one.

Spiegel