Some good news from south of the border today: the US Senate in a surprising show of backbone, voted to cut off funding for the Pentagon's Terrorism Information Awareness Program (formerly known as the Total Information Awareness Program), despite the urging of the White House. (See, for example, the Washington Post .) The Post gives a good summary of the program:
The $54 million initiative seeks to develop a database of public and private records that could be combed for patterns that may reveal terrorist activity. Authorities could search credit card bills and airline records, as well as health, education and other personal information, the Pentagon told Congress in May. Other elements of the proposed program included developing long-distance surveillance technology that could identify people by their gaits, or, from closer in, by the irises of their eyes.
Why should this concern Canadians? First, anything that happens in the United States affects us because of its proximity, its size and its influence. Any Canadians travelling there would be affected. In fact, anyone in the world surfing the net or sending email would be affected as so much of the internet is either located in or routed through the U.S. Second, there is an element in Canadian society that feels that anything the United States does we should do to. This particular feeling has grown stronger since the election of George W. Bush. Whether it's born out of a feeling of inferiority or just a wish that our society was as right-wing as America's, this belief is especially found in the National Post, the Alliance Party, and the governments of British Columbia and Alberta. Were the United States actually to start the Terrorism Information Awareness Program, you can count on this group to start demanding that Canada do the same. Third, it's easier to take away rights than it is to restore them. Once you develop such a database and allow officials to sift through it, it would be difficult to reverse the decision. So, thank you, U.S. Senate for your common sense and courage.
Other good news, this time local: Vancouver Mayor Larry Campbell has an almost 80 percent approval rating, according to a recent poll quoted in the Vancouver Sun. That's quite astounding, considering the lack of action on safe injection sites and his push to hold a referendum on the Olympics (which he then campaigned in favour of). Perhaps it's because people feel he's doing his best. There have been grumblings that he is much more centrist in power than he was as a candidate and there have been rumours -- especially in the community papers -- that he bullies councillors from his own party who disagree with his positions. Certainly, I don't agree with every position he takes (I think he's been far too tolerant of the police crackdown in the Downtown East Side for one thing), but overall, he's done a good job. And there's certainly a different atmosphere at City Hall. The people there seem much more receptive to new ideas and to listening to local citizens instead of just the business groups. Campbell and his fellow COPE council members have my support, in the main.
Ironically, the poll was commissioned by a coalition that's pressing for expanded gambling in Vancouver. They argue that the mayor is so popular that he can accede to their demands and it won't hurt him very much because of his high approval rating. In other words, he should open the floodgates to vlt's and other forms of gambling, in spite of the people of Vancouver not wanting it, because the casino owners want him to. I hope the mayor and council stand firm on this (though I am not optimistic - the provincial NDP opened the doors to legalized gambling when they were in power in the 1990s, despite the feeling of many on the left -- including me -- that gambling is a regressive, punative tax on the poor. Gambling revenues - and the poor gamble in disproportionate numbers - go to fund social services and allow governments to cut the taxes of the middle and upper classes.) The CitizenLink website has a good summary of studies done on this issue. See the Casino Gambling Reports website for a Canadian perspective.
Posted by wetcoast at July 18, 2003 03:12 PM