Dismantling the RCMP

I put the idea forward in a post the other day. Macleans has an extended critique of the force here. The magazine doesn't appear to endorse my idea as a solution though they did say this:

"In B.C., where nearly a third of RCMP officers are posted—and where critics say criminal networks have gained the upper hand on understaffed Mounties—the stakes are even higher. Two weeks ago, the chief constable of the West Vancouver municipal police floated the idea of a regional force on the Lower Mainland, an idea that would remove the cities of Burnaby, North Vancouver, Richmond and Surrey from the RCMP's bailiwick."

Why limit it to the region? BC, and every other province, ought to get its own provincial force. The RCMP polices far too broad of an area and appears to be doing it ineffectively. What has saved them so far is the romantic image that mounties have in movies and television. Romantic images are not a good basis for policy choices.

Update: Dr. Dawg has been saying this for a while.

Self-Hating Canadians at Macleans

The folks at Macleans have delivered another jeremiad about what's wrong with Canada. There's no link on the website yet, but this recent one is on page 32 of this week's issue. After articles in recent weeks about how we aren't competitive in the global economy and how we take too much vacation time, now we get scolded for not having any global brands. Author Andrea Mandel-Campbell twists a Chinese proverb about a tiger and a fox so as to call our nation an economic squirrel. Really.

According to the article, most of the brands that Canada does have are run by immigrants and/or transplanted American executives. I'm not sure why immigrants don't "count" as Canadians in this tirade, but Mandel-Campbell says it is so. Applying this to other countries, does Andrew Carnegie not count as an American success story as he was from Scotland?

Anyway, once again Macleans has another article scolding Canadians as a bunch of timid losers, do they think that this will turn us into a nation of entrepreneurs. Floggings will continue until moral improves.

One final addendum: What about Harper's brand of Conservatism? It's drawn heavily on Harper's mentor, Tom Flanagan, one of those transplanted Americans that Ms. Mandel-Campbell was so concerned about.

U.S. History (and Canadian Prophecy?)

Atrios has a post today on the mainstreaming of radical right-wing ideas in the US. Money quote:

"Over the last few decades we've seen just about every radical conservative idea be completely mainstreamed into our politics and discourse, while at the same time the Noble Defenders of the Left Flank like Joe Lieberman Weekly and Joe Klein have valiantly fought to ensure that every political idea or thought to their left on the rough political spectrum is declared to be "extremist." It's marginalization rhetoric which paints those who those who have those ideas as not just wrong, but actually ineligible to have a seat at the debate table."

This is, I think, a fair assessment of the success of far-right groups in the US in the past two decades. I can't help but think that this is exactly what Stephen Harper wants to import. It's been said that he wants to shift Canadian politics so that the Conservatives are the new "natural governing party" of this nation. The new cadre of editors at Macleans, the alarmist (and alarming) Ezra Levant and his rag, as well as a variety of think-tanks (Fraser among others) are more than willing to facilitate this mainstreaming of radical right-wing ideas.

Conservatives of both the small and big "c" variety are feeling ascendant in this country. The challenge will be to respond to their attempts at driving national discourse. In the US they were aided and abetted by a complacent and sometimes sympathetic media, we have no reason to assume the media will behave differently here.

Canadian Law For Dummies or Why Police Should Not Pick Judges

I've now seen another voice trying to assure me that police picking judges is okay. In this case it's from the right-wing hacks who pass as the editors of Macleans:

Nor do we have a problem with Mr. Harper's inclusion of a police representative on the JACs. It is only natural that lawyers and judges would want to monopolize the process, but the community is better served by a multiplicity of informed viewpoints.

Is the view of one group - cops now a "multiplicity?" What they - and everyone who supports this stupid plan - fail to see is that Canada's courts (like those in most industrialized nations) are adversarial in nature. The police are typically on the side of the prosecution. This manner of selecting judges is tantamount to letting the crown put a finger on the scales of justice. It doesn't matter whether we trust cops or think that they are nice or good people or whatever, in criminal law they are not a disinterested party. Watch one episode of Law & Order and you can figure whether or not the cops want to convict the accused. They are, for better or worse, part of an adversarial system.



Picture: Craig Bromell, do you want this man picking your judges?
Video: The Clash - "Police On My Back"