Yesterday, Brian Lilley’s producer asked me to be on their show. I asked what the subject matter was. She indicated it was about a poll they’d had done, and a column I wrote on the weekend about sexual education in Ontario schools. I hadn’t written a column about sexual education in Ontario schools, but whatever. Send me the poll, I said. So she did.

The poll is seen here. All of the loaded questions it poses are grossly misleading. One, at page five, is factually incorrect. It states: “The teacher’s guide currently in use in Ontario instructs teachers to not alert parents when sensitive material may be raised in the classroom.”

That’s false. That’s more than false, actually: it’s a lie. I checked with the Ministry of Education. Here’s what the guide actually says, at page ten: “Sending a school newsletter home at the beginning of each term is a best practice for keeping parents/guardians/caregivers informed of all upcoming equity topics in the classroom without having to single out one topic over the other.”

So, when I tried to address that on Brian Lilley’s show, here’s what happened:

You can decide for yourself whether Brian, who says he is a free speech advocate, acted in a very free-speechy way. I don’t think he did.

Brian, however, isn’t the issue. The issue is that the questions in the poll are highly misleading or, in the one example cited above, unadulterated bullshit. There’s nothing in the Ontario curriculum that says not to notify parents when sensitive subjects come up. The reverse is true. And, what they are referring to (I think) is a Toronto District School Board guidebook. And that guidebook actually says it is the “best practice” to notify parents at the beginning of every term about all of the topics that are going to come up.

The other questions in the Abacus survey about sex ed are also based on misinformation, or worse: that’s because there is no such “proposal” on the table, full stop. The proposed changes came out 2 years ago, and were sent back to the drawing board by the Premier himself. There is no current proposal to change the curriculum, so it’s status quo from the 1998 curriculum – a curriculum developed, by the by, under the government of Mike Harris and Tim Hudak. If anything, the Abacus polling perhaps shows that Dalton McGuinty understood and was in sync with the public mood two years ago when he sent the proposal back.

Let’s say that again, without my mic being cut off this time: the sex ed curriculum being taught in our schools is the same one put in place by the Harris government in 1998. The point of the curriculum is to make sure kids can identify the parts of their own body (i.e. so if someone is molested they can identify to their teacher or police where they were touched), to have a healthy self image, and to understand in later grades that while abstinence is best, there are very real consequences to unsafe and unprotected sex. It would be irresponsible not to talk to students about this stuff. It would be insane.

But what is really going here? Let’s put it all on the table. What the McGuinty government (and every government, irrespective of partisan stripe) is targeting is bullying. As parents and leaders, we need to make sure we are doing everything we can to make all of our schools accepting places. That means accepting of everyone – gay kids included.

Now, as soon as you say that, you get the Far Right SoCon kooks up in arms, as has recently happened in Ontario. They’ll always try to push whatever button they can to scare people. We saw that in the Ontario election campaign, when Hudak – despicably, falsely – tried to scare people about cross dressing six year olds. It’s a lie.

Personally, I think Ontarians can be proud that their government, and their Premier, is saying enough is enough. We’re not putting up with it anymore. Our kids are not putting up with it anymore. And we’re not going to let anyone – Brian Lilley included – make them feel like they deserve any less than any other kid.

Now, go ahead and cut my mic off. I’ve said what I wanted to say.

UPDATE: Longtime TV broadcaster (and former Conservative staffer and candidate) Jordi Morgan weighs in:

Comments (110)

Filled with the festive spirit, Krista starts reading Canada’s best-loved political book on-air.

Comments (9)

My pal Brian Lilley, who tells me he’s a free speecher, just cut my microphone off in the taping of his show.  Wow.  Like, wow.

This is one Sun News segment that may be worth watching!  Broadcast times here!

Comments (37)

My friends at the Sun, and others, have a story up this morning about Ontario public servants getting bonuses. Here’s what the stories don’t say:

• Um, they’re not bonuses. In 1996, Mike Harris changed the way management in the public service was paid, and took a portion of their salary and tied it to performance.  And in the election Tim Hudak pledged to expand it.
• The managers have a portion of their salary that is related to their performance. It’s not automatic. They have to earn it. One would think that’d be something conservatives would approve of, but I guess not.
• In 2009, McGuinty slashed the pool of possible recipients by 30 per cent, and froze salaries. So he’s gone beyond an actual freeze and cut the amount paid out by a third.  That sort of thing didn’t happen in the Harris/Eves/Hudak years, as I recall.  All they did was close hospitals, close hospital beds, and fire nurses.
• Nobody can rewrite the employment contract terms of 8000 people retroactively. If you know how to do so, without kick-starting multi-million-dollar lawsuits, fill me in.
• Again, so no one misses the point, including Tea Party North: Hudak said he’d expand bonuses for health care managers – despite the fact that he’s now supporting Flaherty’s plan to allow for privatization of health care, and closure of hospitals, etc.

Comments (18)

…and they will.  Headline on Akin’s story this morning:

“Tory MP wants to ignite Parliamentary debate on abortion”

UPDATE: Stinson at Post is among the first to go after it, here.

Comments (48)

Mine, anyway.  Take a bunch of art student musicians from different countries, toss in some Pavement and Clap Your Hands Say Yeah, and hey presto! A tune catchier than a drawer full of fish hooks.

Comments (5)

That’s what Leader-for-life Bob Rae called me, recently. I had thought (nay, hoped) he was referring to me, personally, but it may be that the Supreme Leader was also referring to all bloggers.

That can be the only logical explanation for this, which is stupider than dinosaurs, and just about as modern.

Comments (40)

In response to today’s Sun column on Jason Kenney, I just got a super-nice email from one Blaine L. Mcdonald, wherein the Deloittes man – who, ironically enough, works at one of the mega-firm’s Arlington offices – rails on and on about “immigrants” and “failed immigration policy.” And that sort of thing. Using firm email.

Anyone able to help me find out more about this charming man?

UPDATE: Mr. Mcdonald has surfaced.  He’s sent me an ass-covering email in which he says he’s abroad on Deloitte’s business, and used a firm laptop by “mistake.”  Methinks, instead, that some managers at Deloitte’s got a Google alert about Mcdonald’s “mistake” and told him to fix it, pronto.

Comments (4)

Comments (41)

Quote:

The complaint filed by Joe Nowak, president of the Kitchener-Conestoga federal Liberal association, was obtained by The Record and includes the phone number Siopiolosz traced.

When called, the number goes to a voice mail for the “Conservative Party.” The message asks callers to leave their name, number and a detailed message and says the party will get back to them within three business days.

Fred DeLorey, director of communications and deputy director of political operations for the Conservative Party of Canada, confirmed in an email “that the number was ours.”

Kitchener-Conestoga Conservative MP Harold Albrecht, reached on Monday, was so surprised by the situation that he called the number himself. He said he found the ownership of the number troubling and the message unprofessional.

Good on Albrecht.  His party, meanwhile, are led by the biggest bunch of scumbags to hold power in Ottawa since, well, ever.

They’re going to keep doing this sort of shit, too, until someone is found culpable.  That’s where my focus would be – jailing a few of these Segretti wannabes.  Comb the Code to find any and all sections that would apply.  And then keep going at them, relentlessly.

General Provisions

Obstruction, etc., of electoral process

480. (1) Every person is guilty of an offence who, with the intention of delaying or obstructing the electoral process, contravenes this Act, otherwise than by committing an offence under subsection (2) or section 481 or 482 or contravening a provision referred to in any of sections 483 to 499.

Intimidation, etc.

482. Every person is guilty of an offence who

• (a) by intimidation or duress, compels a person to vote or refrain from voting or to vote or refrain from voting for a particular candidate at an election; or
• (b) by any pretence or contrivance, including by representing that the ballot or the manner of voting at an election is not secret, induces a person to vote or refrain from voting or to vote or refrain from voting for a particular candidate at an election.

Comments (11)