The $75 iPod Tax - the Big Lie!

You may have seen the recent Conservative Party attack ads on TV that state that the “Michael Ignatieff-led coalition” wants to introduce a “$75 iPod tax”. Where did this supposedly new tax on iPods come from, and why is it $75?

Well, like much of the Conservative Party advertising, this “iPod tax” is an immense stretch of the truth. On March 16 2010 the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage voted to include “devices with internal memory” in the definition of “recording medium” in the new copyright legislation, Bill C-32. The purpose of this revised definition was to ensure that devices with internal memory, such as the iPod, are considered as recording media, just as blank cassette tapes and CDs are considered recording media.

There is currently a tax on blank cassette tapes and CDs which is apparently intended to compensate recording artists for material that is copied onto the blank cassette tapes and CDs. With the definition of “recording media” broadened to include “devices with internal memory”, recording artists might also be partially compensated for performances that are copied onto a variety of devices, including MP3 players and iPods. So it is highly misleading, if not an outright lie, to refer to this as an "iPod tax" since it will, I assume, cover every device that can be used to record digital music, including your PC.

Why should we, as former CBC Radio 2 listeners, care about Bill C-32? And what does this have to do with CBC Radio 2, the subject of this blog?

Well, first of all, all those who care about classical music should be interested in ensuring that performers receive fair compensation for their recordings. While I am sure that the Rolling Stones are not going to be impoverished by the explosion of digital music sharing and downloading, the average performer of classical music could see their livelihood threatened. So we should all be in favour of Bill C-32, at least in this provision.

What has this to do with CBC Radio 2? Well, if we are ever to see CBC Radio 2 return to its past glory, I would like to think that there are musicians who can make a decent living by recording classical music.

Now, onto the Conservative Party attack ads. I think the following video captures the essence of the issue quite well. Have a look.

The Bushification of CBC Radio Two

I recently decided that the English language needs a word that succinctly describes the case when a corporate manager, leader of a country, religious leader or other zealot assumes control of an organization, country or religious group, makes significant changes to said organization or country and then rides off into the sunset, leaving the organization, country or religious group in significantly worse condition than before.

Since Sarah Palin is busy ‘refudiating’ the policies of those Godless Communists, the Obama administration, I thought I would step in here and offer a term. In honour of George W. Bush, the 43rd President of the United Sates, I offer the term ‘Bushify’.

I thought I was being original. Of course, the term has long since been coined. I see it has already been defined as “To get something very wrong, in any area of life” (unwords.com) and “the act of taking a word that wouldn't normally have "ificate" or "ify" at the end and adding one or both said suffix's’ (urbandictionary.com). However, I think my definition is broader in scope, and certainly more useful.

Consider the origins of the term ‘Bushification’ or “to Bushify’. When George W. Bush assumed office, the U.S. was running a budget surplus, unemployment was at record lows, the U.S. was at peace with the rest of the world and the future seemed bright for the U.S. Of course, we all know what happened. Tax cuts for the wealthy, budget deficits, two wars in the Middle East, a housing bust, a financial system meltdown and record unemployment. Don’t you think that the U.S. was really, truly Bushified during the Bush administration?

On Friday, August 6 2010, the CBC announced that Richard Stursberg, executive vice-president for English language services, was leaving the CBC, effecitve immediately. The announcement included this statement:

“When Richard was appointed executive vice-president of CBC Television six years ago,” said Mr. Lacroix, “he brought with him a revolution that shook the foundation of the organization and eventually of the whole of our English services. He challenged every premise, attacked conventional wisdom, and uprooted whole parts of the internal culture.”

Wouldn’t if have been more succinct to have simply said “Mr. Stursberg thorougly Bushified the CBC during his tenure.”? I find the term “Bushify” to be much more evocotive, and concise, than Mr. Lacroix’s more long-winded statement. (In fairness to Mr. Lacroix, I should also note that he is also quoted as having said “Six years later, the institution is better off than it was. I want to acknowledge his success in turning CBC Television around and thank him for his contribution.” But I think we can all read between the lines of his statement and see the thinly veiled reference to the Bushification of the CBC.)

What other applications can we think of for this term? Stephen Harper’s Conservative minority government has thorougly Bushified Parliament? Stephen Harper and the Conservatives are attempting to Bushify Statistics Canada? The possibilities are endless.

So remember: Bushification, the act of Bushifying an organization or country. You heard it here first.

Hypocrisy reigns supreme in Ottawa

Recent reports from Ottawa suggest that Mr. Stephen Harper is planning to appoint eighteen senators before the resumption of Parliament in January. If Mr. Harper fills these Senate vacancies then indeed Mr. Harper's hypocrisy and abuse of power will know no bounds.

Mr. Harper and the Conservatives promised to implement Senate reform during the 2006 and 2008 election campaigns. In the past three years in office, Mr. Harper avoided filling Senate vacancies in accordance with this pledge. Now, Mr. Harper apparently plans to renege on these promises and fill these Senate vacancies, fearing that his government may be defeated when Parliament resumes in January.

What is even more galling is that Mr. Harper was permitted by the Governor General to prorogue Parliament without any conditions placed on the government during the interim period until Parliament resumed. Perhaps the Governor General believed the Prime Minister would behave honourably and that it was not necessary to explicitly state the conditions under which the prorogue request was granted. An honourable man would not now abuse this trust and fill the Senate with his Conservative cronies before his government is defeated. However, as Mr. Harper has demonstrated by his past actions, he is not an honourable man.

This will be my last comment on the political shenanigans taking place in Ottawa - my last comment, that is, until the next outrageous act of the Conservative government and Mr. Stephen Harper.

Some comments on the current political crisis in Ottawa

During the most recent election campaign the Conservatives portrayed Stéphane Dion as an inept, bungling, dangerous candidate for Prime Minister.

Since the election, a mere seven weeks ago, Prime Minister Stephen Harper has managed to foment a political crisis on top of the economic crisis that we currently face. As it now appears likely that the Conservative government will prorogue Parliament, having obtained the consent of the Governor General, the Conservative government under Prime Minister Harper has narrowly averted a constitutional crisis. Still not satisfied with the current dismal state of affairs, Prime Minister Harper is raising the spectre of a renewed national unity debate with his continued references to 'separatists' participating in the Liberal/NDP coalition. Has Prime Minister Harper no shame? Who now is the inept, bungling, dangerous Prime Minister?

We should all bear in mind the following points when considering the political crisis that we now find ourselves in and the possible responses to this crisis:

First, Prime Minister Stephen Harper violated his own election promise to hold elections on a fixed schedule by calling the October 2008 election, citing a 'dysfunctional' Parliament as the reason for holding an election.

Second, in spite of having had over two years to win the trust of the Canadian electorate, the Conservative government under Prime Minister Stephen Harper failed to gain the support of over 62% of the Canadian electorate, obtaining only 143 seats, insufficient for a majority.

Third, although Prime Minister Harper vowed to participate in a more civil Parliament, within days of opening the current session of Parliament the Conservative government introduced motions in their economic update that were mean-spirited, partisan and clearly designed to fracture any spirit of co-operation among the political parties. Furthermore, the economic update failed to provide any meaningful vision or plan for dealing with the worst economic crisis that Canada has experienced in the past fifty years.

Fourth, the other three parties in the House of Parliament represent Canadian voters and have been duly elected by over 62% of the Canadian electorate. It is their duty to attempt to form a government if a majority of the members of Parliament have lost confidence in the government.

Fifth, to deny the legitimate right of the other three parties to attempt to form a government because of their political views, no matter how much we may disagree with them, is to attack the very heart of parliamentary democracy and is the response of tyrants and demagogues.

Clearly, Prime Minister Stephen Harper and the Conservative government have lost the confidence of those who have been elected by the voters of Canada to represent them in Parliament. The Liberal/NDP coalition must now be given the opportunity to form a government. To do any less would violate the system of parliamentary democracy which has served us well for the past 141 years.

I realize, of course, that this posting has nothing to do with CBC Radio Two, but it must be said.