Daily Archives: February 24, 2012

OTTAWA, ONTARIO--(Marketwire -02/24/12)- Marketing Freedom continues to reign across Western Canada following a ruling by the Manitoba Court of Queen's Bench today that upheld the Marketing Freedom for Grain Farmers Act.

"Western farmers are pleased with the Court's decision today," said Agriculture Minister Gerry Ritz. "Our Government knows that producers need market certainty as they move forward and this decision allows farmers the best possible opportunities to succeed as they transition to an open market."

The Marketing Freedom for Grain Farmers Act is now law and farmers can forward contract their wheat and barley with buyers of their choice for delivery beginning August 1, 2012. The CWB also remains a viable, voluntary marketing option for farmers of all commodities in all parts of Canada. Giving Western Canadian farmers marketing freedom will build a stronger overall economy by attracting investment, encouraging innovation and creating value-added jobs.

"We are working with farmers, the grain value chain, the CWB and provincial partners to ensure an orderly transition to a dual-marketing system that encourages entrepreneurs to seize new markets, increase sales, and drive the economy," added Minister Ritz. "The Harper Government remains focused on doing what is best for the agricultural sector by giving farmers the right to choose how they market their grain."

In his decision, the judge accepted the Crown's arguments in their entirety and found that the requirement for a producer plebiscite (section 47.1 of the former Canadian Wheat Board Act) did not apply to the new Marketing Freedom for Grain Farmers Act (Bill C-18).

On December 16, 2011, the Manitoba Court of Queen's Bench denied the initial request for an immediate injunction on the implementation of the Marketing Freedom for Grain Farmers Act.

The Government's top priority remains the economy, and Canada's agriculture industry plays an important role in creating jobs and keeping our economy strong. Modernizing grain policy in Canada will allow the Western Canadian grain industry to contribute even more to economic growth through the entrepreneurial energy of wheat and barley farmers.

Additional information can be found at http://www.agr.gc.ca/freedom.

Go here to see the original:
Harper Government Applauds Manitoba Court of Queen's Bench Ruling on the Marketing Freedom for Grain Farmers Act

24 February 2012 Last updated at 06:49 ET

Dame Shirley Bassey is to receive the honour of freedom of the city of Cardiff, it has been announced.

The decision was taken by Cardiff councillors on Thursday.

Leader Rodney Berman said the honour recognised Dame Shirley's contribution to Wales, the Welsh capital, showbusiness and her charity work.

The 75-year-old singer was made a Dame in 1999, and will be performing at a special concert to celebrate the Queen's Diamond Jubilee in June.

Mr Berman said: "The work she has done in promoting Cardiff and Wales is priceless. It is hard to think of someone from such a humble upbringing in Butetown and Splott who has gone on to become such a huge international star.

"She has never forgotten Cardiff when it has come to helping us mark milestone events in the city - such as the opening of the Rugby World Cup in 1999 and the concert at the Millennium Stadium to mark the start of the 2010 Ryder Cup.

Continue reading the main story “Start Quote

I for one cannot think of a more worthy candidate to receive this award”

End Quote Rodney Berman Leader, Cardiff Council

"I will personally never forget seeing Dame Shirley steal the show in her Welsh flag dress at the concert to mark the official opening of the National Assembly for Wales."

The council leader said Dame Shirley's charity work deserved recognition in itself.

He added: "Whether that's for the scholarship which bears her name at the Royal Welsh College of Music and Drama or for her long-standing and very generous association with the Noah's Ark Appeal for the Children's Hospital of Wales as Patron, she has done much to help others in Cardiff over a number of years.

Dame Shirley will become only the 61st person to be given the freedom of Cardiff in the 116 years since the first award was made.

She will be joining an illustrious list of recipients that include Winston Churchill, Nelson Mandela, Pope John Paul II and Princess Diana.

Highest honour

The honour was last given to an individual in 2006, when it was awarded to the former president of the Welsh Rugby Union and Victoria Cross recipient, the late Sir Tasker Watkins.

While the freedom of the city does not confer any special privileges, it is the highest honour that the council can award.

Arrangements are now being made for a special ceremony to mark the honour, and will take place later in the year.

The rest is here:
Dame Shirley wins freedom of city

When it comes to freedom of speech and freedom of religion, you can’t have one without the other. The attempt to redefine marriage here in Maine (again) also tests this union of freedoms.

Our Founding Fathers knew the inherent connection of these two integral freedoms and demonstrated their supreme relevance to a free society by making this the primary amendment in our Bill of Rights. Including free speech and religious freedom in our Constitution’s First Amendment was profoundly wise and arguably one of their greatest contributions to political history.

Because one of the Christian Civic League’s major tenets is defending religious freedom, I am greatly concerned about the language recently submitted for the same-sex marriage petition that seeks to redefine marriage here in Maine.

The question reads: “Do you favor a law allowing marriage licenses for same-sex couples that protects religious freedom by ensuring no religion or clergy be required to perform such a marriage in violation of their religious beliefs?”

The inclusion of religious freedom in this petition language is the same smokescreen used in New York which allowed legislators to justify accepting political pay-offs in order to abandon the defense of natural marriage. The language in the New York law and the Maine petition gives the false impression that residents’ religious rights are being broadly protected, but that is not the case.

The prescribed protections pertain only to clergies specifically in regard to wedding ceremonies. Think about what a tiny number of people that represents. There is no protection for faith-based organizations or other individuals who find participation in a same-sex marriage contrary to their religious beliefs.

So whose religious freedoms are being protected?

Ask the adoption agencies and foster care providers in Massachusetts and Illinois who closed their doors rather than being forced to provide services to same-sex couples.

Ask the town clerks in New York who refused to grant marriage licenses based upon their religious beliefs — deputy clerks could have still provided licenses and protected the rights of both parties.

Ask the New Jersey Christian campground owners who refused to rent their facilities for a same-sex civil union.

What about the florist or the organist who objects on religious grounds? What about public educators who have been suspended or fired for stating their opinions regarding same-sex marriage?

The challenge with freedom of religion and free speech is they often get messy. Defenders of the Constitution are well aware not all speech (religious or otherwise) is noble; as a matter fact, sometimes it may be very offensive. This is where political correctness has been allowed to run roughshod over what should be protected religious speech.

Those who defend natural marriage are more and more becoming aware their position is controversial and to some offensive. Attempts to silence these views are gaining momentum through campaigns of “tolerance.” As distasteful as some opinions of those who oppose same-sex marriage may be, lovers of freedom (conservative and liberal) should unify in opposition to any attempt to erode constitutionally protected speech.

Many times I am asked, “Why do you oppose the redefinition of marriage? How does it impact you and your marriage?” This is not about my marriage or any one marriage. There are societal consequences of undermining the fundamental building block of civilization — marriage. Threats to marriage have indeed already impacted religious freedom and free speech across our country and here in our state.

The protection of religious freedom and freedom of speech is not the only reason I oppose redefining marriage, but it certainly is at the epicenter of this critical debate.

We have a long year ahead of us before Mainers show up to the voting booths and determine whether or not they desire to redefine marriage. I believe society should protect and defend marriage, not undermine it.

Carroll L. Conley Jr. is executive director of the Christian Civic League.

More here:
Freedom, liberty and marriage

Conservatism has contradictory impulses. The pursuit of freedom and the pursuit of order run at cross-purposes.

Moderates push neither button too strongly. But in both Canada and the United States, the conservative parties are now controlled by virulent wings that are prepared go to aggressive lengths to achieve their ambitions. The danger is that in the name of freedom, they bring forth the contrary.

More related to this story

In this country, the Conservative government has a nationalist bent, evident in its elevation of military values, populist anti-intellectualism, moral certitude on foreign policy, law-and-order fixation and message-control mania. This kind of nationalism requires state-driven conformity, not liberty.

And so, while Conservatives are supposed to cherish government that is off the backs of the people, what we have is something closer to the opposite. The government is also oversized in spending, another conservative no-no.

The Conservatives’ in-your-face proclivities from the minority years have been well documented. But a majority has brought no let-up. On the freedom front, the government likes to boast of encouraging provincial autonomy and of shutting down the gun registry, the long-form census, the Wheat Board. But, by way of contrast, it’s instructive to look at what has transpired in our land of liberty recently. It might make you wonder about the kind of Canada that’s emerging.

Last week, the Conservatives were planning to go ahead with a system of national online surveillance. But a national outcry against the plan (originally advocated by the Liberals) will likely force amendments. The government also reaffirmed its plan for mandatory minimum sentencing, although an Ontario Superior Court judge lambasted the policy and critics say it will reduce the right to a fair trial.

Earlier in the month, from a government that took no umbrage at Guantanamo-style justice, came the decision to accept information derived from torture from foreign governments, in some cases. The Conservatives, we recall, have also vowed to bring back long-expired post-9/11 antiterrorism powers that allow Canadians to be locked up without charges.

On the matter of political freedom, another debate – the one on the controversial copyright bill – has been moved behind closed doors. The Tories are increasingly resorting to this secretive in-camera approach. Despite having a majority, they have been cutting off democratic debate with near record-breaking usage of time limits and closure in Parliament.

Freedom of expression has also been in the news. Last week, disgusted representatives from the Canadian science community sent an open letter to the Prime Minister calling for him to stop muzzling federal researchers. Under the government’s extensive vetting system, civil servants and diplomats are less free to voice their views than they have ever been. Also recently, opponents of the Northern Gateway pipeline were pilloried as foreign-financed radicals and, according to one sworn affidavit, as enemies of the state. And during last fall’s Durban summit on climate change, the Conservatives denied opposition members their usual right to accreditation.

The Harperian high command takes a draconian stance against even soft drug use. It has taken a hard line against organized labour and a more exclusionary course on immigration. It will no longer allow Canadians imprisoned abroad to serve out their sentences at home.

The many victims of Tory smear campaigns have been well documented, a most recent target being Montreal MP Irwin Cotler.

On Thursday, the Ottawa Citizen reported that Elections Canada and the RCMP are investigating a fraudulent robo-call phone operation apparently designed to suppress the Liberal vote in Guelph, Ont., during last year’s election. Calls misdirecting voters in many other ridings have been reported. The NDP linked the operation to the Conservatives, but Prime Minister Stephen Harper denied any wrongdoing by his party.

The accumulation of dirty tricks is beginning to sound like something out of Nixonland. The last election, we recall, was the one where citizens were hauled out of Conservative campaign rallies for the sin of having marginal ties to other parties.

This is just a small sampling from the march of audacities in respect to our freedoms and liberties. It’s the new Canada. Enjoy.

Read the original:
The 'freedom' show on the Rideau