Arctic sovereignty just shallow politics

The recent fervor created by the “new” Canadian Government over exercising sovereignty in the Arctic is a two-edged sword that will serve only to use up a lot of tax dollars to prove nothing and likely limit the ability to defend our populated borders.

By reneging on an election promise to build three new icebreakers to be used “showing our presence” in Arctic patrols, the Harper government has altered the course of the deal. Instead of three new icebreakers, now we're getting up to eight “ice light” breakers scheduled for service by 2014. The new ships will have the capacity to carry out some duties in the Northwest Passage in fine weather.

The vast untapped potential of the natural resources known to exist beneath the icy waters at the north pole are only “ours” ostensibly in that we don't recognize the same claims by U.S. and Russia.

Instead of worrying that a foreign submarine and the occasional U.S. icebreaker is cruising about the Arctic Circle, what can Canada do to secure this vast territory of ice and water?

Nothing. Well, virtually nothing. Given that the U.S. controls practically our entire economy, we can’t expect any future natural resource extraction in this region of our 'True North' to be free from American interests. They already have vested interests in everything from the oil sands in Alberta to the gas stores off the Scotian Shelf, so who is Harper trying to kid?

The political optics behind the Arctic icebreaker deal was a desperate attempt to shore up Canadian “anti–American” sentiment from Conservative voters during the last election. To our view, it’s pure vote rigging.

The new vessel announcement has left coastal naval defense in jeopardy of losing a lot of patrol cash, leaving Canada without adequate defense to areas where potential threats actually exist. Building the new ships will create some much-needed work both in Halifax and in Vancouver, which is good news for dockyard workers, but the plan is far from waterproof.

The relevance is not for us, but for the next generation of Canadians who may possibly draw some benefit when the Arctic thaws and the Northwest Passage is open year-round. The effects of global warming on coastal communities will accelerate the shipping of disaster relief by shaving over 5,000 kilometres to reach the stricken flood zones.

Senator says law should go to pot

A Liberal Senator from B.C. is proposing Canada legalize marijuana and “tax the hell out of it.”

Senator Larry Campbell seems to be the only politician lately to say openly what many have been thinking for years; why are so many police hours tied up busting people for smoking dope?

What are recreational pot smokers actually up to? Unless the feds consider a case of the munchies, incessant giggling followed by a movie and a long snooze as criminal behaviour, reality must finally win out. Look what decriminalization did for Holland.

The idea to legalize pot was touted by the Chretien Liberals in the last millennium, but the laws have regressed since then. Even the head of police chiefs for the country said publicly that legalizing pot would save tens of thousands of convictions annually, millions in tax dollars while freeing up a lot of police time for serious crime like murder, rape and robbery.

Stephen Harper is not about to legalize pot unless a poll can show that a majority of conservative voters in Ontario and Quebec toke. Harper could use this notion to his advantage and blame all of his unfulfilled promises on short-term memory lapse by voters.