C-6 Canada Consumer Product Safety Act (allows government recalls of dangerous products)

C-8 Family Homes on Reserves and Matrimonial Interests or Rights Act (gives equal property rights to aboriginal women)

C-13 An Act to amend the Canada Grain Act (modernizes how grain delivery is regulated)

C-15 An Act to amend the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act and to make related and consequential amendments to other Acts (minimum penalties for serious drug offences)

C-19 An Act to amend the Criminal Code (investigative hearing and recognizance with conditions) (reinstates anti-terrorism powers for law enforcement)

C-20 An Act respecting civil liability and compensation for damage in case of a nuclear incident

C-23 Canada-Colombia Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act

C-26 An Act to amend the Criminal Code (auto theft and trafficking in property obtained by crime)

C-27 Electronic Commerce Protection Act (cracks down on spammers)

C-30 Senate Ethics Act (unites House and Senate ethics oversight under one watchdog)

C-31 An Act to amend the Criminal Code, the Corruption of Foreign Public Officials Act and the Identification of Criminals Act and to make a consequential amendment to another Act (gives police more fingerprinting powers)

C-34 Protecting Victims From Sex Offenders Act (strengthens sex offender registry)

C-35 Justice for Victims of Terrorism Act (allows victims to sue terrorists)

C-36 Serious Time for the Most Serious Crime Act (eliminates “faint-hope” parole)

C-37 An Act to amend the National Capital Act and other Acts (An Action Plan for the National Capital Commission)

C-40 An Act to amend the Canada Elections Act (expands advance polling)

C-42 Ending Conditional Sentences for Property and Other Serious Crimes Act

C-43 An Act to amend the Corrections and Conditional Release Act and the Criminal Code (more rights for crime victims in parole process)

C-44 An Act to amend the Canada Post Corporation Act (ends Canada Post monopoly on international letters)

C-45 An Act to amend the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (cracks down on human trafficking)

C-46 Investigative Powers for the 21st Century Act (gives police powers to hunt online predators)

C-47 Technical Assistance for Law Enforcement in the 21st Century Act (allows police to wiretap digital communications)

C-52 An Act to amend the Criminal Code (sentencing for fraud (cracks down on white-collar crime)

C-53 Protecting Canadians by Ending Early Release for Criminals Act (ends accelerate parole review)

C-54 Protecting Canadians by Ending Sentence Discounts for Multiple Murders Act

C-55 Response to the Supreme Court of Canada Decision in R. v. Shoker Act (gives court power to require blood and urine samples)

C-57 Canada-Jordan Free Trade Act

C-58 Child Protection Act (Online Sexual Exploitation) (cracks down on child pornography)

C-59 An Act to amend the International Transfer of Offenders Act (makes it harder for offenders to be repatriated)

C-60 Keeping Canadians Safe (Protecting Borders) Act (allows more Canada-U.S. co-operation on marine law enforcement)

C-61 An Act to provide for the resumption and continuation of railway operations (back-to-work legislation on CN Rail strike)

C-63 An Act to amend the First Nations Commercial and Industrial Development Act and another Act in consequence thereof (enables commercial real estate development on reserves)

S-5 Long-Gun Registry Repeal Act

S-6 An Act to amend the Canada Elections Act (accountability with respect to political loans)

S-7 Constitution Act, 2009 (Senate term limits)

S-8 Tax Conventions Implementation Act, 2009 (implements tax-evasion treaties with Colombia, Greece and Turkey)

NEWS

Mike Schreiner today officially launched his campaign for the leadership of the Green Party of Ontario (GPO). Running unchallenged, Schreiner is a respected advocate for independent businesses and strong communities, who brings a formidable record of business and job creation to the leadership of the party.

For the first time in GPO history, Mike will be a full-time party leader. He will focus on building and growing the party by establishing a professional party organization and setting ambitious fundraising and membership targets.

As the GPO actively prepares for the 2011 provincial election, Schreiner will focus the party around three broad themes:
• Creating a ‘Green Economy’ – including a Green Tax Cut
• Strong, sustainable communities
• Healthy people and a healthy planet

QUOTES

“The parties at Queen’s Park represent big government, big business and big labour respectively. Only the Green Party advocates for strong communities, the creation of tomorrow’s jobs – today – and care for the 21st century, through illness prevention and promoting healthy living.”
– Mike Schreiner, GPO Leadership Candidate

“I’m excited that the GPO has a leadership candidate who can build winning teams and deliver a winning message so that the GPO is a relevant, professional political organization that will elect Green MPPs.”
– Shane Jolley, GPO Deputy Leader

QUICK FACTS

• Green Party members will ratify Schreiner’s leadership bid by a confidence vote at the GPO Leadership and Policy conference, taking place in London from November 13-15, 2009.

LEARN MORE

For more information on Mike Schreiner’s campaign visit MikeSchreiner.ca

Check it out!  You can find her at:
www.RedMollie.com
www.facebook.com/RedMollie
www.twitter.com/RedMollie_com
www.myspace.com/redmollie

Follow Mollie, Become a Fan, And pass it on!!!

Click here to view the embedded video.

Click here to view the embedded video.

This story is current and local, but other than that is not really news.  Every industry is now dominated by these multinational corporations.  Their mandate, which is the driven by the market economy that our culture has embraced, is to increase shareholder value with all other considerations being secondary.  Another example of this on a somewhat smaller scale was very well articulated by George Monbiot in a recent column which he ends with, “This might look like a battle over diversity and local character. Underneath it is a struggle for democracy.”

No amount of effort on the part of citizens or workers, regardless of the small successes in battles that may be won from time to time in communities around the world, will have any appreciable or lasting impact on the relentless drive to consolidate, merge, grow, profit or manipulate the circumstances under which these companies operate.

Only a change of mandate for corporations will do that, and that gets to the very definition of corporation and the bedrock definitions in our world economy.

Whether it’s the effect on Vale-Inco workers in Sudbury, the decimation of locally owned small business in Britain by big box stores, the poverty and malnutrition of the citizens of the Nigeria, the genocide in Darfur, or 100,000 dead Iraqi’s killed by the Americans in order to open the country back up to the oil industry, you name it, it’s the same story.  Virtually all of these examples are a direct result of our economic system.

So long as the workers of Sudbury, and everywhere around the world that people are still allowed to vote, continue to fight these small battles while simultaneously voting for the status quo, the long term outlook is bleak.

Monbiot is absolutely correct.  It’s a struggle for democracy.  Not the sham that most of the democratic world is involved in where most of the world votes between 2-3 parties with the same world view anyway and electoral results would not actually change anything meaningful.  Real democracy.  Where the basis of the world economy, the results of the drive for never-ending growth, and the mandate of corporations to profit above all else rather than benefit local communities can be questioned and debated.

In small groups around the world, when the results of all of this hit home, we rally and fight and say we want it to be different, and then every 1-2-3-4 years or so we vote for it to be exactly the same.

On a recent vacation to New Brunswick, Mollie and I arrived late to our camp site in Kouchibouguac National Park.  Early enough to set up camp, but late enough that the local grocery store in nearby Richibucto was closed.

For the few provisions we needed to supplement dinner, Mollie purchased several highly overpriced items along with a fillup at a gas station in St Louis de Kent.

Now I am one of those people who keeps gas receipts, writing the odometer reading down with each fill up and diligently recording the purchase in a spreadsheet.  I have years worth of data showing gas prices, kilometers driven and the fuel economy of my car.

Here is the receipt from this transaction.  Does something look wrong to anyone else?

My first hint was the 63 litres of gasoline.

I drive a 2005 Pontiac Vibe with a 49 litre tank. You couldn’t physically fit 63 litres of fuel into this car.  My fillups, even when I feel I’m running on fumes, are never more than 45 litres. 

So it would seem that the gas station adjusts the number of litres purchased upwards to account for the other products purchased in their store. Based on my average mileage on this trip, this fill up should have been about 42 litres, not 63.  And Mollie confirms the extra $20 is about right for what she bought.

At first you might think who cares, so long as the total price is the same?

But by doing so I am charged taxes incorrectly.

$0.10 per litre federal excise tax x 63 litres.

$0.145 per litre road tax x 63 litres. (I can’t find the NB Road tax on google, this is calculated.)

I’m sure the HST is applied to everthing anyway.

Based on my estimated fillup of 42 L, that makes it a $5.15 overcharge.

Perhaps this is an error on their part, but I can’t see how.  I’ve never run a gas station, but I’m thinking you would have to account for the amount of gas sold versus the amount of gas purchased wholesale, and if your books say you sold more than you bought it might raise questions.  So their gasoline inventory books would have to reflect the actual litres sold and not this made up number.

And if they are remitting the federal excise tax and provincial road tax based on the record of actual litres sold, they would be pocketing the extra $5.15.  Multiplied by hundreds or thousands of customers, that could be a lot of money.

I was overcharged, that much is clear.  Either the federal and New Brunswick governments came out ahead on the deal, which I doubt, or this gas station owner is guilty of something.

Of course, all of this is merely a means to compile the Conservatives electoral database and that’s fine as that’s the way the game is played, though I would strongly object if they were found financing this through MP’s budgets rather than party funds. Hmmm…

This latest mailing, though, states, “The Conservative government.  Investing in airports. Investing in you.” and goes on to talk about the investments in airport security that the feds are making.

Well no one would object to being safer, of course, but I have to ask how often have you not felt safe on a flight from a Canadian airport?  We had that Air India event, but that was quite a few years ago.  And 911 not so long ago.  Of course joining with the US and going round the world pissing people off will make enemies, so I guess it’s logical that we may be at some increased threat level from what used to be.

Frankly I feel far safer using air travel that driving in a car, particularly here in the GTA where we seem to license almost anyone who can see over the wheel and many who cannot, with no consideration of testing people on manual transmissions, no consideration of the differences in winter driving, no consideration of mandated snow tires, etc.

And half of this expenditure seems to be based on making air travel more efficient to “improve the passenger and freight air service experience.”

To what end? To decrease the hassle factor and thus increase people’s interest in traveling by air?

Where is the recognition from the Conservatives that air travel will seriously decline as a means of personal transport in years to come? Serious Climate Change policy would make this necessary, so I can understand why the Cons don’t mention this as many of them still don’t believe in it, and they still view such policies as a choice.  Fair enough, even if I disagree.  But Peak Oil will make the diminishing of air travel inevitable in the not too distant future, except for the super rich (and likely the politicians spending our money) so there is really no choice involved.

If you don’t believe me, reference what Jeff Rubin has to say about air travel.  He lays out the case fairly well.

It’s astounding that the Conservative Party still manages to snow people into believing they are strong stewards of the economy, when they get so much of it wrong.  They completely failed to predict the current recession even though many of us were saying as loudly as possible that it was coming.  And they seem to be missing all the signs of economic upheaval that Peak Oil will bring.

Banking on the future of air travel is a flight of fancy.

But the twittersphere and my google search for “Green Party” sure have been busy sending updates.

Of all the comments I read so far though, I like this one the best: (emphasis mine)

THOMAS KLAU, Center FOR EUROPEAN REFORM:

“The most striking feature of the election results, and I’m speaking, of course, as of now, is the fact that the center-left parties across Europe, the Social Democrats and Socialists have not been able to give a plausible answer, political answer, to the economic crisis.

“We haven’t seen … a far-right wave washing across the European continent. That has not happened.

“The rise of the Green Party has been striking. The Green Party are the one political force in the EU that has (been) closest to creating a true European political party, a true European political movement … with a political message that is strong and plausible, pro-European, that looks for European answers to the big problems the world and European society are facing, starting with climate change, of course.

“This is something that a substantial part of the electorate has welcomed. The success of the Greens, I think, is a clear indication there is a substantial part of the electorate that responds positively to European parties that give a European answer to the big problems of the day.”

For those who want to see the parade, they’ve published a handy route map.  Well, it’s a map.  And it has some lovely lines on it.

Okay, truth be told, I really don’t have any idea what this map is supposed to be telling us.  This has got to be the most useless map that I’ve ever seen.  Where’s the start?  The finish?  How do you go on Yonge and Old Yonge at the same time?  What’s the direction of travel?

WTF?  Seriously, can anyone explain this?

I’ve really got nothing to add.   George Monbiot makes the case quite well, and it amounts to this:

If you think Climate Change is questionable; if you think it is some distant crisis; or if you think that a swift and dramatic response is optional for a species that wants a future, WAKE UP and THINK AGAIN!

For those who may not be aware, yes, you can have a water heater that does not involve heating up a tank and keeping it hot forever just in case you might want some.  Here’s a typical installation if you’ve never seen one.

The first time I ever heard of tankless hot water was from my mother after her trip to Europe in 1978.  These heaters were commonplace in Holland then and still are.  In fact, tank based systems for residential use are hard to find there. (Likely since they make less sense that the tankless version.)

Mollie and I switched to tankless two years ago after buying our “recession house.”  Yes, it was a bit of a learning curve, but the savings are there if you are willing to adjust your thinking a bit.

But back to the Star…

A tankless water heater needs extra maintenance, he found. It has to be serviced once a year with a vinegar solution to keep it clean and functioning properly.

“Estimated cost is $100 a year – more than the gas savings.”

This is an apples and oranges comparison.  Yes, you have to be aware to keep the unit clean by doing the annual flush AND/OR by having a water softener for all water going into it.  But if the owner was not ALSO flushing his tank every year and willing to live with the constantly degrading efficiency, why the double standard?

He had to remove his water-saving shower heads, since there wasn’t a strong enough flow to keep the water heater on.

Admittedly there are issues with pressure and this takes a bit of work/thought.  There can be a problem with these shower heads, but I think it’s more likely that there are other contributing factors.

The tankless heaters have an inherent pressure drop just from the design of the heat exchanger that tanks don’t have, so if you make the mistake of installing them without any other changes in your piping system you might notice a pressure problem.  I had this problem and had to go back and replace a few gate valves with ball valves to avoid the problem.  You also have to look at your cold water system to make sure you have somewhat equal pressure drops in hot and cold sides, or else adjusting your temperatures can be problematic.

It should also be noted here that this problem would be avoided with a tankless unit installed in new construction since the system could be designed to accomodate.  It’s only an issue for retrofits and it just takes a bit if careful thought.

“I now waste more water waiting for the hot water to arrive. It takes 10 to 15 seconds every time you turn on the tap for the hot water to get up to temperature – and up to a minute with the tap on full for the hot water to arrive on the second floor.”

Really?  And the hot water residing in your tank was magically transported to the second floor?  Instantaneously?  No waiting?  Gimme a break.

But seriously, in new construction the heater could be placed closer to the faucets and avoid some of this delay.

“Many households take longer showers. From 10 minutes, they go to 12 minutes, knowing they won’t run out of water. So, what happens to the savings? Zero.”

Yeah.  I don’t know what to say to that.  Apples … meet oranges.  Comparing 10 minute showers with a tank to 12 minute showers with tankless and being disappointed with the result is rather a giant mental leap.  So, if the price of gas were higher this article would say that people are switching to 15 minute showers and saving nothing?  BS!  THEY ARE HAVING 15 MINUTE SHOWERS, which I think we could all agree is the basis of the problem.  Forget the tankless water heater, why don’t you start by keeping your showers to under 5 minutes!

Realistically I think that most people who go so far as to install one of these things is already in the mindset to save water as well as energy, so this comment is moot.

You may be disappointed with what you get when you need a trickle of water – say, to clean a razor blade while shaving. The cold water has to flow through the tankless unit and kick on a heating mechanism. This can take a while.

“Tankless systems won’t give you the same hot water in a low-flow scenario as what you get from a storage tank,” Krill says.

No kidding.  So try putting some hot water in the sink and leave the tap off while you shave.  Was that so hard?  Again, these tankless hot water heaters require a bit of thought about your habits.

A hot water tank uses about 40,000 BTUs of energy (British thermal units) but a tankless unit uses five times that, or 200,000 BTUs. “It fires up the burners and pounds the cold water to raise the temperature to 120 degrees Fahrenheit,” he says.

Well, mine is 130,000 BTUs.  They come in different sizes just like tanks do.  So what?  This represents an instantaneous energy flow.  To get to total energy used you have to consider how often the burner is firing compared to the smaller burner on a tank that fires far more often.

And there’s a second problem here.  120 degree F?  Are you kidding me?  Why would you possibly need your water that hot?  If you have it set that high you will have to mix in cold water for your shower and lose all that energy that you just paid for in heating the water for nothing.

A friend bought a model that has a remote panel so he can dial in the temp water he wants and then only needs to turn on the hot water for showers.  Each family member has their prefered shower temp.  Sadly, the one I bought does not have this but my next house will.

The municipal water temperature is about 70F in summer, but can drop as low as 40F in winter.  The tankless unit has to work harder to heat water from 40F to 120F. This means your endless supply can run out in the cooler months.

I see.  And the tank does not have to work harder because it is on that different, magical municipal system?  I’m sorry, but if you run out in the winter you merely did not choose the correct size of heater for the conditions in your house.  End of story.

So, scale back your expectations in winter. Instead of two showers and doing dishes at the same time, do the dishes later.

Ah, now we get to the heart of the problem.  [Dripping sarcasm deleted.] As I said before, these heaters do take a bit of getting used to and some adjustment of habits.  Yes, larger units are available which would allow for two showers and doing dishes at the same time, but they will not have nearly the savings of a smaller heater which requires that showers not be simultaneous.  Two people in the same shower works well, but this could also results in substantially more than 12 minutes. 

Next week we’ll look closely at the cost of buying/renting a tankless water heater system.

I can’t wait.