Read this article coming out in Maisonneuve and decide for yourself.
(free registration required)

Angry in the Great White North takes a look at just how hard up MPs are, salary-wise, since apparently the government can’t afford to give Canadians a break at the pump on gas taxes, to help take the edge off of high gas prices.
Those taxes are needed, in part, to increase the travel allowance of MPs and senior civil servants by 10%, so that they aren’t unduly troubled by those same high gas prices that are killing the rest of us.
Angry yet?
Well, to be fair to the Liberals, all MPs get the same break. I’d like to see the Conservative caucus make a public show of under-reporting their mileage expenses in order to make a point. It’s not like that money would come back to Canadians, but sometimes symbolic gestures matter.
The NDP? I assume they don’t submit expenses, ever, so that the government has more money to spend on social programs. I’m sure that’s what they do.

Well, important for non-Canadians.
If you are already in the country, marriage means whatever you want it to mean thanks to Svend Robinson and the Liberal government in Ottawa. But beware if you are trying to enter the country. Then if you haven’t done every last bit of the marriage ceremony to the most conservative and strict interpretation, then go back home!
We don’t need your kind here. Only people who take marriage seriously are allowed to enter Canada.
We have standards to maintain, doncha know.
Read all about immigration officials abusing an Indian couple for not being “properly” married at Angry in the Great White North.

Is it just me, or does Rick Mercer seem a bit desperate in trying to come up with a reason for why we need the CBC?
Personally, I think he’s scared of Atomic Betty.

Angry in the Great White North has been digging around Cindy Sheehan’s statement that she’s nearly run through her son’s insurance benefits, and finds all sorts of interesting information suggesting that Cindy Sheehan has been fibbing…again.

Angry in the Great White North has added another entry to his list of Church vs State posts. Looks like the Pope is going to bring down the hammer, which means Paul Martin and his pet priest Father John Walsh are in trouble.
The Pope and a synod of bishops are considering making it an across-the-board policy that politicians who vote in favour of legislation that runs counter to an issue of morality will be denied communion in any parish church.
Paul Martin will have to drop the phrase “good Catholic” from his resume. And Father Walsh might have to look for a new job. Under this rule, Walsh’s attitude that politicians get a special pass on actually being moral Catholics is rightly identified as so much hogwash. Walsh either plays by the new rulebook or looks for a new team.
Bet this ruling, if adopted, is going to affect a lot of Liberal, Bloc, and NDP MPs. Expect a lot of howling about separation of Church and State, which to these people means one thing: whatever I do is fine!
I don’t expect Pope Benedict to be particular worried about upsetting the likes of Paul Martin. Do you?

Did Scott Brison, Minister of Public Works and Government Services, let the scandal cat out of the bag?

From Hansard:

Mr. Jason Kenney (Calgary Southeast, CPC): Mr. Speaker, is that not interesting? The minister will not deny that he claimed yesterday that an invoice was seized when in fact, by all appearances, over 100 boxes of evidence were taken from the offices of his department.

Hon. Scott Brison (Minister of Public Works and Government Services, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, the fact is that there are several ongoing RCMP investigations and Public Works has cooperated fully with the RCMP.

Beyond that-

Some hon. members: Oh, oh.

Scott Brison needs to explain himself. He announced "several" ongoing RCMP investigations on the floor of the House. That was captured in the official transcript. He should be required to enumerate each and every investigation, when it was started, who is running it, and the nature of the allegations being investigated.

Let’s see what happens on the floor of the House next week.

[Cross-posted from the Western Standard. Extended entry at Angry in the Great White North]

From the Globe and Mail:

David Dingwall resigned Wednesday as president of the Royal Canadian Mint.
The former Liberal cabinet minister has become embroiled in controversy after it was recently revealed he failed to register as a lobbyist for a Toronto pharmaceutical company.
In a statement Wednesday he said he believed all of his actvities were above-board.

A chink the in the Liberal armour? The first resignaton of many?
Or a speedy resolution to an isolated problem?
I know what I’m putting my money on.
While we wait to find out, I guess we can also place bets on how long it is before Dingwall is named to the Senate or is made a judge.
(Special congratulations to Simon Tuck and Jeff Sallot at the Globe and Mail who have been working this story for months.)
[Cross-posted from Angry in the Great White North]

From Angry in the Great White North, news about legalized polygamy in the Netherlands:

The Netherlands and Belgium were the first countries to give full marriage rights to homosexuals. In the United States some politicians propose �civil unions� that give homosexual couples the full benefits and responsibilities of marriage. These civil unions differ from marriage only in name.
Meanwhile in the Netherlands polygamy has been legalised in all but name. Last Friday the first civil union of three partners was registered. Victor de Bruijn (46) from Roosendaal �married� both Biance (31) and Mirjam (35) in a ceremony before a notary who duly registered their civil union.

Angry poses the question: is this really a polygamous relationship, legally, or just a case of a bigamist being tolerated by the State?
The difference is important, since as a bigamist, the only legal relationship is between the man and each wife. The wives have no legal relationship to each other, or to each other’s children.
In that legal void lurks all sorts of problems.
If Canada starts to tolerate bigamists as a way of allowing polygamy through the back door, it won’t be long before the legal problems with that approach forces these people to demand formal recognition and new laws to cover their “lifestyle”.
Angry has more analysis.
Now watch as Canada yells “Yippeeee!” as it careens down the slippery slope.

Stephen Taylor, ever on the bleeding edge of blogging technology, will be releasing the first of 3 podcasts with his interview with Conservative MP and finance critic Monte Solberg. Following close on the heels of that will be the interview with MP Andrew Scheer.
If you don’t have an iPod, here’s your excuse to get one. Of course, you can always listen to the interview with your computer’s MP3 player, but then I don’t get any Amazon referral fees that way.

Angry has two theories as to why Gilles Duceppe plans to stay in Ottawa instead of taking the reins of the Parti Quebecois.

Possibility #1: The PQ might win the next referendum.
Possibility #2: The PQ might not win the next referendum.

How can you argue with that?

So now the possibility exists that Canada will soon see a two-tier health care system, in which people with means can pay for essential services out of their own pocket directly, or by purchasing private health insurance, which until the Supreme Court ruled last week, was not allowed to cover essential services, thereby guaranteeing the government monopoly on keeping us healthy.
Now the possibility exists that soon I will be able to use the compensation I receive from my employer to enhance the medical services my family receives, assuming I can afford it.
Sounds like a reason for me to go into work and be more productive and earn a raise. Sounds like a reason for everyone to go to work and be more productive and earn raises.
Let’s hear it again how two-tier health care is going to wreck Canada. Imagine a nation of hard-working people using their wits and sweat to make things better for themselves and their families.
I guess those people are right. It sure ain’t the Canada we’re used to.
[Cross-posted at Angry in the Great White North]

From Warren Kinsella’s musings for June 10, 2005:

Did you feel that tremor, yesterday morning? It was Canada changing under your feet. Without you, the voter, being asked first [by the judiciary] whether you approve.

He was talking about the health care ruling. Or was he talking about same-sex marriage?
Seems to me that some people are selective about which rulings are earthquakes that require approval and which ones are common sense that we must accept without substantive debate in Parliament or grassroots opposition.
Funny thing is, the health care argument is based on a right that does appear in the Charter (“security of the person”), while sexual orientation is not listed in the Charter as a basis for a charge of discrimination, nor is marriage listed as a right.
[Cross posted at Angry in the Great White North]

A comparison of two experts who have pronounced on the Grewal tapes — one who said they were altered deliberately, and other who said they were clean recordings.
You have to decide which of the two is more credible.

As reported by Angry, The ethics commissioner Bernard Shapiro has had a bad few days, coming under some severe criticism from the House of Commons ethics committee:

“He’s making it up as he goes along; he’s not sure of himself,” Hebert said after grilling the ethics commissioner about the Grewal issue and about a separate investigation of former immigration minister Judy Sgro.
“He comes across as incompetent; he obfuscates his answers.”

Angry wonders if the opposition are planning to use the commissioner’s poor performance to their advantage in the future.

Angry in the Great White North notes Tony Valeri’s priorities for the government for next week.

Adoption vs Abortion
This should be a difficult question, but for some people, the answer comes far too easily.
As an adoptee, I know where I, Danger Guy (aka Angry in the Great White North aka Steve), stand.