On a recent flight from Costa Rica to Toronto, I was required to show my passport 9 times and was searched 3 times, most of which was required because of a flight connection in the US. The ordeal brought on flashes of wartime movies where suspicious Gestapo officers checked travelers’ papers on night trains to Switzerland and I wondered, “Isn’t this what our forefathers fought and died to prevent?” We tolerate these distortions of democracy because we believe that they are the lesser of two evils: it is better to live with the loss of privacy and freedom than to live in fear of crime and terrorism.

Some surveillance may be necessary in order to protect citizens but new technologies have made possible the collection of personal data by governments, groups, companies and individuals with few, if any, restrictions. They can enter your home, steal from you and leave without your knowledge. They offer no compensation or benefit in return. The transaction, if you could call it that, is purely one sided and it is making some people very rich. Many of the names of these companies you will never know or recognize, but there are also companies that everybody knows such as Microsoft, Facebook and Google who are among the worst offenders.

We used to keep our valuables in vaults or banks but today there is a new “valuable” – it is you! Buying preferences, likes and dislikes are helping advertisers get directly to the people who are most likely to buy their products. It may seem like a small efficiency but the collection of personal information about individuals is already a 30+ billion dollar business and it is expanding quickly. “Real-time bidding” is the presentation of advertising based on your recent Internet uses. The highest bidder gets to advertise to you based on your profile which may inspire images of the slave trader auctions of the 1800s.

For example, not long ago, I bought a digital SLR and went to the manufacturer’s web site to register for the warranty. I was puzzled when shortly after that everywhere I went on the Internet there were ads for the camera I had just purchased. The information didn’t “leak” from the manufacturer, but from the “tracking cookies” that were placed on my computer that were sending information to unknown people about my Internet research on the camera.

Although this was an invasion of my privacy, this example may seem relatively harmless, but the potential for harm is huge. Could your life insurance be cancelled because you showed interest in a high-risk sport like hang gliding? Could your research into alternative cancer treatments become known to, and possibly influence a prospective or current employer? Emerging technologies will require home appliances to be connected to the Internet. “Smart Appliances” will have the potential to report every time you open your fridge or turn on your stove. They will be able to measure your carbon footprint and send you a bill. The potential for abuse is enormous!

Technologies have given us some new freedoms but they have also created new challenges that without regulation and controls could cause serious harm. The EU is leading the way with controls on the collection of personal information from the Internet. Canada is expected to follow their lead but the “devil is in the details”. The business of tracking Internet users is exceptionally lucrative making deterrents such as fines and prosecutions irrelevant. For information pirates, these are considered just a cost of doing business.

Facebook provides no content – its users do that. Facebook collects the information you provide and sells it to advertisers – that is their business. They have been fined and accused of collecting data even when the user has “opted out” of their collection. They have also been accused of retaining data even when the user has deleted it.

The government of France refused to use Microsoft products because in their words the software was design to make it easy for others to get into their data. Google has an equally dismal record, yet Obama selected Facebook and Google as his advisers on Internet privacy policy. This is like assigning the fox to protect the chicken coup. He is not serious about protecting citizens’ privacy.

Regulation of information collection is expected from the (Canadian) Privacy Commission, but I am prepared to bet that it will have little effect on curtailing the “money junkies” from collecting your personal information. There is just so much money to be “made”. The better way to stop information theft is to charge the companies who use the information. The Information Highway (as it once was called) is the equivalent of the 401 with lots of potential dangers – there may be laws but you have to be aware and protect yourself.

Some easy ways to protect your information include using multiple browsers rather than one, thus limiting access to parts of your profile. You can buy a Virtual Private Network (VPN) service for about $5/month. You can shut off cookies in your browser and turn them on only when visiting known and trusted sites; and you can write the Privacy Commissioner when you feel your freedoms have been violated. They only get involved in prosecutions when someone complains.

Personal profiling on the Internet is dangerous because we don’t know what information is being trapped or by whom. We also don’t know who will use it and for what purpose. It can be moved anywhere in the world in an instant and it may be kept forever. That concerns me and it should concern you, as well. The information belongs to you because it is part of who you are. It is being taken from you without your knowledge and permission in most cases, and although it is not a tangible, it is of significant value. We have laws about stealing your physical property. Your personal preferences, interests and desires, though intangible, are still your property and need to be protected with the same intention and determination as your money.

As I searched quotes about capitalism, I soon realized that there were significantly more quotes against capitalism than for it. They came from renowned politicians (including Churchill), economists, business leaders, gangsters (Al Capone) and even US founding father, Thomas Jefferson. Yet, we are told all the time in the media that there is no better system than capitalism. In fact, you may be branded a communist and or even a threat to a successful, progressive society simply by questioning the fairness of capitalism. In light of the melt-down of capitalism in 2008 and the world-wide repercussions which we are all still feeling today, it is appropriate, maybe even prophetic, that 2012 is the United Nation’s International Year of Cooperatives.

Cooperatives are an alternative to the idea that capital (money) is the most important ingredient in an enterprise and therefore deserves the majority of the rewards (profits). Alternatively, cooperatives are founded on the premise of people working together for their mutual benefit. They are unofficially defined as “an organization owned by its members who use its services”. Cooperatives first appeared in the UK in the mid 1800s. They differ from other organizations in that they benefit the members based on the amount they use the services of the organization rather than on the basis of their capital input. This frees the organization to serve members’ needs rather than focusing on returns for investors.

There are many examples of large scale cooperatives in Canada and around the world: ACE Hardware, Mutual of Omaha Insurance, State Farm Insurance, True Value, Piggly Wiggly (USA), Mountain Equipment Coop, Co-operators Insurance, Gay Lee Foods, Desjardins Group, United Farmers of Alberta, and Coop Atlantic. There are over 9000 cooperatives in Canada employing 155,000 people with more than 18 million members. In Waterloo Region, you can buy general insurance, life insurance, and banking and financial services from credit unions. Cooperatives provide energy services, food production, housing, and mutual purchasing, to name just a few. Almost any service can be acquired through a cooperative here in the Region. Cooperatives are an alternative that is based on the principle that there is a synergistic effect which benefits all the participants when they work together.

When the banking system collapsed in Argentina and owners deserted their businesses and their workers, they were taken over by cooperatives (groups of workers) and run very successfully – even to this day. After the economic storms subsided, the owners and managers tried unsuccessfully to regain control.

Families are the simplest form of a cooperative, and when any group works together, large or small, and the parties mutually benefit, it’s a cooperative. Cooperatives place value on all the components that make an enterprise successful, not just capital. Most corporations’ sole objective is to make as much money as possible, any way they can. Corporations have no conscience and rarely are they prosecuted for their crimes the way individuals are. Every day in the news, we see the consequences of unconscionable greed by multi-national corporations. Could cooperatives be an effective alternative to the unbridled self-interest that threatens to destroy the planet and our financial systems?

Capitalism’s greed is considered “tolerable” in part because we don’t believe there is another alternative. Its values and objectives are in direct conflict with the environment, the public, and governments whose mandate it is to serve the common good. Cooperatives offer an alternative and a model for people to accomplish almost anything. They are the way of the future and the past. They benefit the 100% rather than the 1% and they are capable of stimulating innovation, creativity, and efficiency without overly exploiting the planet or its workers.

challenged and stirred more emotion that any of the hundreds of films I had reviewed.

The setting is North Korea. The central character is a husband desperately seeking medicine for his very ill wife. We learn that the only solution to his problem is to pass illegally through the border into China to get the medicine. For many Christians in North Korean, life is very difficult – they face persecution, diminished human rights, and many are refused work. The only way to escape is to illegally enter China and then travel overland to South Korea with the help of an underground railroad. The desperate husband reckons that if he is going to risk years of jail to get the medicine, he may as well escape to freedom.

Few people understand this man’s life, but the film powerfully reveals the desperation, fear, and courage people face when they risk their lives and futures for freedom. The most moving footage shows a group of refugees attempting to force their way through a wall of North Korean police into the safety and freedom of the Japanese consulate. Some escape, others are captured – it is heart wrenching.

I promised myself after the film I would do something to raise awareness of these people who want only a chance to work and live with some dignity. My research into the subject revealed complications and, as usual, corruption in the handling and treatment of refugees coming from North Korea. It muddied the water somewhat for me.

This week Kim Jung II “Beloved Leader” died suddenly of a heart attack – his death offers North Koreans hope for the future. His 3rd son was named as successor, although for millions of Christian North Koreans, it is unknown how and if things will change. Those who have escaped the North took the opportunity to demonstrate in Seoul.

For many of us here in Canada, this story is just another blip on the daily news screen, with little background understanding or significance to us. It is difficult to keep up with all the issues that are going on in the world. There are so many problems that need our support and engagement, we may wonder how WE can do something to contribute to positive change?

In a recent interview for Wisdom-radio with Dale and Linda Bolton from Organics 4 Orphans, Dale described how this revolutionary organization was birthed. On seeing literally millions of orphans (victims of the AIDS epidemic) they committed themselves to do something. They somehow got over the fact that they were two people facing a 40 million person problem. They began with the premise that even if they could help only a few hundred children, it would be worth their effort. They, however, grew in understanding of the culture and the problems and discovered better solutions. It has been a journey of amazing revelation and innovation. The key was their commitment to do something. After that, all the rest came together.

As 2011 comes to a close with one of the great celebrations of family and caring, we should evaluate what we have done for others and how we can do our part to make a positive impact on our world. All around us we are challenged with needs. We may think we can’t do much to solve the world’s problems, but over and over again, people of modest means and expertise make enormous changes for good. Their key is commitment and endurance. 2012 will be filled with opportunities to become engaged in your community and to find a place to serve. You can’t do everything and you can’t do ‘nothing’. The world, our country, and our community need you and what you have to give no matter how small you believe your impact will be. Find an issue to affect for good. Find someone or something that needs what you have to give and 2012 will be the beginning of the best years of your life.

At one time, there was a very good operating system called CPM that was crushed by a late arriver MS DOS. Commodore once had a future in personal computing until it went head-to-head with the PC (IBM Personal Computer). Atari had a superior computer for a long time but was eliminated in an “early round” by the fashionably late PC clone. Xerox produced the feature-rich, Venture Publisher, that was “marketed” out of the business by Adobe Page Maker for Macintosh – a far inferior product.

Almost none of the original players are around today to enjoy the fruit of their ground breaking labour. The forerunners who dream and challenge new horizons don’t always make the best managers. Steve Jobs may appear to be an exception – he stayed close to his function as “Head-Dreamer” of the company and it worked for him and Apple.

Being second or third into a big market has proven to have its advantages. Research In Motion conceived and birthed an idea which required a tremendous amount of creative and technological resources, only to have others build on and innovate the idea. It is much easier to refine a good idea than it is to make it a reality. RIM’s competitors have made a place for themselves “frilling up” a monumental technology with a user friendly interface (Iphone) and a fortune of supplementary applications which appeal to anyone and everyone’s personal interests. Some of these apps are “software froth” and some are well conceived and designed add-on functions to the main and original idea of mobile e-mail, internet and phone service.

RIM still has a unique market advantage in spite of the press that is determined to destroy them. Their networks are secure because they operate them. That one advantage for an intelligent and informed consumer is worth trading all the “frills” any marketing manager on steroids can come up with. It seems that RIM’s superior security has irritated more than one government. Saudi Arabia wanted a “backdoor” into the Blackberry system in order to spy on their people. Somehow, Blackberry was “responsible” for the riots in London in August. Their networks were secure and for that reason rioters used them to organize. The British didn’t like that and called in the Blackberry folks to give an account for themselves. The social unrest and religious persecution of Christians in countries such as Egypt have made RIM the secure and obvious choice of many. For that reason, RIM has gone from being heros to zeros, at least in the press. It would appear for being just too darn good. There are a lot of people who would like them to give up their secure networks so they can  “trap data” and spy on whomever they please. In some cases, that is good and in others it is bad, but who gets to decide which is which?

RIM has a lot of enemies, but the founders are used to fighting for what they believe. They were around long before Blackberry and learned their “tuffs” over years of struggling in order to arrive where they are today. They may have made some mistakes and become mesmerized by their tremendous success for a season, but the next battle is for the survival of the company. My money is on RIM. They have the leadership to make the adjustments that need to be made. They are “forerunners” who can lead the industry again. They have been there and know what it takes to create and pioneer. They just need to remember who they are! As with most forerunners, they don’t mind taking some heat for doing things their way.

I am optimistic about RIM’s future in spite of the media’s intentional attacks and pessimistic predictions. As a team, they are more than what the “barking dogs” (the press) say they are. They have proven their character and good will in the market place and to our community whenever there was a need. This battle is not primarily about stock prices, or shareholder value, or marketing, or PR. It is about control and who is going to get it.

The first line of defense in this battle is character….“character” that says: “I will not let ‘them’ destroy me or this company.” This attitude must start at the top and trickle down through the ranks and infect those not intimidated by a good fight with courage and determination. I’ve seen that from the senior RIM team in the midst of a volley of personal attacks. They stood firm when their leadership was challenged and when “analysts” wanted to break up the company. Their courage and strength tell me they are not finished fighting, and it gives me courage and the conviction that RIM will not only survive, but will flourish.

Recently a friend from San Diego sent me a similar quote about the state of Rome in the era of Cicero. A little research revealed that the original quote (as shown above) had been altered significantly to suit the political views of the plagiarist and his/her view of the solutions to the problems in America. In pointing out the flaws of the “system” and the failing lack of integrity on the part of many of our public officials, the author didn’t see the irony of using deception to get his point across.

The Internet has enabled a new level of everyday “slight of hand”. No one will ever know who altered the quote and the “good” is better than the “evil”, or so they believe. In some ways, big cities, big business, and politics, provide the same anonymity for people. In this state of “disconnect” from the people they serve, those who lead can only feign caring and sincerity.

With the election coming in a few days, politicians are touting campaign promises which will win votes for them. Most of those promises are not so subtle attempts to buy our votes with ‘our’ money. The promises and strategies of all the campaigns are extremely vague. It is political campaign strategy to NOT tell the public what they intend to do in the future because that would divide the voters for-and-against, which does not accomplish their end. That is why there is so much deception, avoidance, and outright lying in most of the campaigns. All of that in the name of “caring, visionary leadership”.

The classic quote from the movie “A Few Good Men” may be the politicians’ self-justification: “You can’t handle the truth!” In the film, the court-marshaled soldier eloquently defends his right to break the law for the greater good because he knows things that others don’t know. That theory may be acceptable in the military, but not in a true democracy. But the problem may not only be that we, the voter, can’t handle or know the truth, but that we just don’t care enough to listen to it. Ontarians, like the rest of the western world, are living at twice the pace of their fore-fathers. We don’t have time to think about things that we don’t have to think about. When we have a moment to consider things beyond our personal lives, we choose to take a much needed break rather than ponder the collective good.

As the ancient philosopher said, “The arrogance of officialdom should be tempered and controlled….”. 2066 years later, humanity is faced with the same problems, requiring the same solutions. The founders of democracy quickly realized that the freedom and the responsibility to make our leaders work for us reside with us. We get the government we deserve.

The advertisement falls on closed minds: “On October 6th vote!”. Citizen cynicism is a symptom of a process which neither includes them, informs them or provides accountability. Our election campaigns have the hard content of an hour with the “National Enquirer”. For that reason, “officialdom” has become arrogant – they rarely have to give an account for their actions.

If democracy is going to work for “us”, it is not enough just to participate in the process by voting. The very nature of our freedom is to be informed, to vote, and to then hold our “officialdom” to account for their responsibilities, promises, and actions. That is the only way democracy will work for the common good. On October 6th be an informed voter and an active participant in making our politicians work for us.

One of the best things about Canada is that we honour a person’s culture and native language. We have two official languages and hundreds of unofficial languages. We have proven with our actions, laws, and financial support that we value and even celebrate traditions of every country and people group. This is to our credit and benefit. We also have created laws and rights which focus on preventing discrimination against sexual orientation, colour of skin, race, creed and culture – all in the name of protecting a person from injustice and abuse. We not only protect these rights, we actually bring them into the public square and celebrate them in a variety of ways. All levels of governments have funded gay pride parades, cultural events, and every imaginable form of celebration of Canadians’ ethnic origins.

Canadians have recognized that a significant part of a human being is connected to his/her past culture and background. Another equally important part of a person’s world-view, values, and objectives is formed in their perceptions of the origin of humanity and the planet. This perception is at the core of the person’s views about what it means to be human and to live a meaningful and “successful” life. In other words, these beliefs are every bit as important to a person as their sexual orientation, race, language, culture, or gender, yet they are being treated quite differently.

More than 90% of the world’s population believe in a superior being who has created humanity and the earth. Yet the few remaining people who have chosen to believe otherwise have pushed all of the people of faith into a corner and required them to be silent in public about one of the most important parts of who they are. People of faith are regularly mocked by arrogant atheists claiming the higher intellectual ground. Science has not, nor ever will be able to prove the origin of the species – it is impossible to do so – it still is only a theory. Therefore, belief in evolution is acquired by faith. We teach evolution as if were a fact when it has no more substance than a religion. The “some” have claimed, by the slight of intellectual hand, control over the “many” because no one is fighting for justice.

If we define freedom and equality for some of our rights in a certain way but exclude a person’s “origin orientation” (faith), it clearly constitutes an inequality. Our government doesn’t fund religious events; furthermore, because of a very vocal few who are hostile to faith, faith has been attacked with attempts to banish it completely from having any public expression. A person may bring their culture, race, sexual orientation, or gender etc., etc. freely into the public square but not their faith – and that is religious bigotry. Faith is the only protected right that is openly and publicly being treated with indignation by a small group of people who believe, in their misguided ignorance, that forbidding any expression of faith in our public intuitions is required by law.

I am always dismayed by those who ignorantly cite “separation of church and state” as justification for bigotry. First of all, that is part of the American Constitution and it does not exist in Canadian law. Furthermore, the founding fathers of the United States were not intending to restrict faith in any way, but rather to create equality for all faiths by prohibiting the institutionalizing of one denomination as the official religion of the nation. They were particularly sensitive to this issue since they were people of faith who had come to America to escape this inequality. It’s rather ironic that the profoundly ignorant justify religious bigotry using a law intended to prevent it.

I can expect that for writing this article in defence of all people of faith that I will be belittled, mocked, and marginalised. People of faith regularly endure attacks on the internet and in print that if directed at homosexuals, Jews, blacks, or East Indians, for example, it would create social outrage. Attack a person of faith, or faith in general, and there is silence. If we believe in equality it must be for everyone.

Is there religious freedom in Canada? An inquiry would reveal that there are vast inequalities for people of faith when compared with the other rights and freedoms protected by our Charter of Rights and that faith is ridiculed and marginalised in ways that others who also are protected by the Charter are not. That is the sad truth even though it is not what most Canadians believe or want for Canada.

Since Bell Media owns roughly half of the newspapers, local television and radio stations in this country, plus a number of specialty channels, some of which are news oriented, I was certain that most of the media would not be covering this story. But it is important news for those of us who have been “baited with a low price” and then “switched to a higher price”. Though $10,000,000 is a significant fine, in the “big picture”, it is not a deterrent. Over the course of 7 years, $10,000,000 is nothing more than a “cost of doing business” for a company that has made millions from this deceptive practice. If it takes 7 years to prosecute a company, what is the deterrent? Furthermore, it is only one issue among a myriad of complaints Canadians have had with Bell’s business practices that have yet to be scrutinized. Although the decision is welcome news, it does little for the millions of customers who were taken advantage of by Bell.

In the US, fleecing the consumer has reached new heights with a practice called “cramming”. Wireless phone companies such as Verizon and AT&T have been fined for unauthorized billing “discrepancies”. The practice of billing for services often never received is blatant “fraud”, yet little is being done to stop the practice. Verizon has issued statements denouncing the billing practice and the FCC has fined them $50,000,000 but cramming is still alive and well in the US and also in Canada.

In Canada, the scam is configured differently but the result is the same. Companies offer you a “special” deal but then bill you the regular price for the service. A simple mistake they say, but its frequency defies a reasonable person’s ability to believe in mistakes. Other forms of cramming are billing for items that were included in your contracted service and for services never ordered. One wireless provider has already been slammed for their high number of “billing mistakes”.

If you think the problems you are having with your provider are unique to you, then you may be encouraged and angered to learn that you are not alone. Your situation may be just another example of being “crammed”.

We live in a world of information overload where “perception becomes reality” and where those perceptions can be manipulated to create an illusion of being ethical. Some corporations believe they can have the rewards of being ethical and unethical at the same time, but invariably, people perceive the illusion is false.

Corporations seem faceless but they are run by people who ultimately are responsible for the actions of the company. We fail to do justice when we prosecute the company instead of the individual. These people commit crimes but never suffer any consequences – they, in fact, benefit from their crime through bonuses and promotions and their reputation is never soiled. No wonder the problem is spreading.

Crimes are not committed by “legal entities” but by people who have narcissistic perceptions of life. Distorted values lead them into the deception that “more is better”, that “survival is of the fittest”, and that “winning is the only thing”. People with these values destroy community, cooperation, and common purpose. They destroy what makes a company and country great. They believe that what they have, is more important than what they are, and that happiness comes from unbridled consumption. They are sociopaths in suits for whom materialism has become their master and they have lost a sense of community or goodwill toward others. Our country and our world are in a “values crisis”. Without intervention, we can only expect things to get worse. This problem and the news story may seem small and even insignificant, but they point to a need for government at all levels to address the growing need for the defence of consumers and prosecution of the individuals who defraud them.

Last fall, I contacted Bell Canada to turn off my phone for the 4 months I was planning on being away. They informed me there was a charge to NOT provide the service. The fee for cutting my phone off for 3 months was $40 or $50 for 6 months. I could disconnect completely but the fee for reconnecting was $110. Because of the way Bell structured its pricing, they forced me to pay $40 for no service plus $20 for service (the 4th month) I could not use, for a total of $60.00. My regular bill for that period would have been just $80. My point, as you may well see, is how can Bell realistically charge me $60 to not provide an $80 service? I paid it reluctantly because there was very little I could do about it and there was no other better choice. I was reminded of the 70s when a Bell representative threatened to cut off my service if I didn’t pay $5.00 a month for connecting an answering machine to “their” line. Then there was the time when I had completed my mobile phone contract only to be charged a $50 fee for transferring my account to Pay-As-You-Go. Bring up the topic of mobile phone carriers at any party and everyone has a story to tell.

I don’t want to give you the impression that I think all companies are bad, they are not. This week I had two amazing experiences with (big box) retailers who demonstrated excellent service and customer care which exceeded my expectations. But alas, not all companies operate fairly. There are plenty of companies that adopt policies that take advantage of the customer, especially if there is limited competition.

One of the great anchors we have as Canadians is our Charter of Rights. It protects us against injustice on a variety of human rights’ issues. We do, however, have limited rights and remedies when dealing with companies. Banks, mobile phone companies, cable, and satellite companies all have an internal complaint resolution system which you MUST go through before a government agency will even look at your complaint. It seems like these companies are being protected by the government and it is a violation of a person’s rights to be forced to resolve a complaint the way the company wants to resolve it. No one can slander or demean you for your age, orientation, cultural background, or religion; however, it seems to be quite Ok to cheat you as long as it can be done via “company policy”. Then if you have enough fortitude to fight back, you have to do it on their terms. No wonder nothing changes.

Canadians need a Consumer Bill of Rights which protects them from the subtle and overt economic bullying, intimidation, and coercion that seem to occur far too often. Read any company’s consumer (legal) agreement and discover how few rights you actually have. There are pages of conditions that protect the company and NOTHING which represents the rights of the consumer. The consumer is left with no rights or provisions for recourse because the company can do anything at any time. The agreements are so one-sided they are ridiculous and I haven`t even addressed the issues related to online transactions and the way some websites require you to pay before you get the conditions of sale. If the consumer ever needed representation and defending, it is now!  The federal government should act to establish basic rights that Canadians can expect from companies that do business in Canada.

We are a peaceful people not given to confrontation, but just because we don’t complain or often report unfair practices, doesn’t mean it isn’t happening. If we need a Charter of Rights in everyday living – and we do, then without a doubt, a Consumer Charter of Rights is needed by Canadians to protect them from unfair practices in the marketplace.

Cap and Trade is not a new idea. It is based on a cap for emissions and the ability to trade any unused portion of that cap amount to someone who may be over the cap – hence the term Cap and Trade. The problems with the system are not in the overall concept but in its execution. The US version of the scheme is so flawed it begs the question, “You’ve got to be kidding?” There are so many loop holes and potential money making “backdoors”, any rational person would see the scheme for what it is – another huge scam! (For more information Google: cap and trade)

The questions we should ask in this situation are:  “How did such a flawed scheme get as far as it has, and who is promoting it?” As one famous investigator said, “Follow the money and you’ll find the answers.” We know who is promoting Cap and Trade – Al Gore. He showed up in Costa Rica early this year and used local flooding as proof of climate change and as a reason for implementing C&T. He revealed his true colours, however, when he said to the Costa Rican business community that they may discover that there is a lot of money to be made in climate change and that they should “put a price on carbon”.

Gore has already made millions from the proposed scheme through his Generation Investment Management company but he is not alone in his support for the C&T tax. Goldman Sachs has been a pillar of support for the plan. You may remember their role in the housing scandal and that their former CEO, Hank Paulson (then Secretary of the Treasury) was at the helm when the US financial system hit the mountain – many people think it was a deliberate act to get the bailout funds (see the film, “Inside Job”).

I believe the planet is in desperate need of  an ecological revolution and that we must change our way of living. I am not, however, about to empower or enrich a bunch of socio-psychopaths in a misguided attempt to do so. Nor am I going to be manipulated into supporting their self-enriching plans as a panacea for real change. We have seen through all of this that greed knows no bounds. This week it was revealed that a hedge fund has been purchasing land in Africa in an effort to make food production their next big “score”. The size of the land is larger than France. If that doesn’t scare you then you don’t understand that there actually are people in this world who are prepared to starve millions of people to make huge profits.

We have become immune to the greed and inhumanity all around us and in so doing have failed to discern the times. These are perilous times that require bold, determined and radical action. In the past, we have seen the resources of the planet squandered while others starved. Today however,  95% of the wealth is in the hands of 5% of the people. Centralized industrial mass food production has the potential for propagating epidemics and famines of mass proportion. Greed empowers a system that is unsustainable and prone to famine and epidemics. Self-indulgence ignores the lives of the weak and the poor. The discerning and wise person looks at the situation and prepares himself.

If you have been frightened by the “climate change story” you need to ask: “Where will that take ME?” If you have been scared by some of the stories that appear in the everyday news, you have to ask; “What does that mean for me?”.  All of these signs of the times, whether far away, or nearby, beg of us to answer the question “What am I going to do about it!”

If you watched the so called debate(s), you may ask yourself: was that a debate? A debate would imply that facts and arguments were used to persuade the listener that one policy is better than another.  That was surely not the case in the recent leaders’ debate. There was almost no policy discussion. Election after election we endure this childish bickering that only politicians and kids can descend to. This isn’t the first time someone has written about how infantile election campaigns have become.  But if they can’t even agree on how to fix the debate, how will they govern the country? Jack Layton said what millions of listeners were thinking that night. How can anything be accomplished in the adversarial climate which characterizes parliament today?

In the last 3 elections, “policy” was upstaged by fear mongering and character assassinations. The media has been no help. Most broadcasters have an “editorial slant” and by inflaming emotions, they circle the wagons around their readers and solidify their “brand”. They learned this from the Americans. It is good for profits but bad for the democratic process. The details of policy are rarely discussed, nor are the finer points of executing that policy – the devil is always in the details. The average Canadian has no idea what is really going on, especially when a part of the elective body’s job (they believe) is to spread disinformation.  Sadly, the political process has become degraded to the bickering of school kids and the brutality of WWF knockdowns.

These are perilous times and the economic crisis is far from over, in spite of what stock prices look like.  Goldman Sachs estimates that speculation is adding more than $27 to the price of a barrel of oil. Many people say that estimate is low. 100’s of billions of dollars are leaving Canada in order that a handful of people can “play” the market for insane profits. The World Bank says food inflation, which is also caused in part by speculation and the US Federal Reserve printing money (QE 1,2,), will cause starvation for millions of people. The world is crazy. Some economists are warning about hyperinflation and a possible collapse of the US dollar. How desperate must things get before politicians work together? What will it take to make MPs stop working for their parties and start working for us?

We need to change the system.  We know that adversarial environments are toxic to creativity, innovation, and change-making in general.  A company couldn’t survive in today’s competitive fast changing environment with such an ineffective form of government.  It’s not the people that are not working, it is the system.  A house divided against its self cannot stand.

Our system of government is hundreds of years old. 200 hundred years ago, everything moved so slowly even parliament could keep up. We can’t afford to be that inefficient today. We need a strong government who can act boldly and provide innovative leadership in the global community. That can’t happen when the people we elect are fighting with each other. It is neither effective nor fun to watch.