Blue Like You

When even the author of a book about the Nanny State phenomenon is taken aback by Toronto’s proposed shade audits and regulations, you know that we really do have a lunatic left-wing element thriving in Hogtown these days.

In today’s revealing National Post article, Turning Toronto into a nanny state, author David Harsanyi reflects:

In an interview, he said a nanny state results when legislators valuing safety above freedom and developing policies that coerce healthy living rather than promoting it. He would definitely characterize Toronto’s forthcoming shade regulations as nannying.

"Can people in Toronto not take care of their own sunburns?" he said. "I’ve never heard of this one before."

This from the man who wrote, Nanny State: How Food Fascists, Teetotaling Do-Gooders, Priggish Moralists and Other Boneheaded Bureaucrats are Turning America into a Nation of Children.

So, way to go Toronto! If your goal is to attempt to be the city with the most regulations and controls on your citizens in the whole world, you could be well on your way.

Perhaps it is some kind of competition - to see which city comes up with the next ban or bylaw that nobody else ever thought of.

(Hey, let’s ban hairspray! That can’t be good for you…)

But when it comes to banning sun vs. shade, I think Toronto made the wrong choice this very damp summer.

After running out of things to ban in Toronto, they have now resorted to targeting sunlight and its effects on children.

Parents cannot be trusted to adequately look out for their children’s safety in this regard, so the City of Toronto is implementing a pilot project including “shade audits” that could end up resulting in the City attempting to regulate shade.

…A future policy could dictate the ratio of shade required based on the number of children that typically play in an area–and not just from trees, but from city-built special canopy structures, screens and sails. ..

One would assume that the City of Toronto would have megatons of excess money with which to fund these studies, the required structures, and all the bureaucracy that would go along with it.

Either that, or else they firmly believe that you can’t put a cost on protecting the children of Toronto from their irresponsible, slovenly, popcorn-and-beer-consuming parents.

But the problem remains that parents might take their children out of the city where there are no protective sunshine bans.

Perhaps His Blondness and Co. should just ban parenting altogether, and move all the kids into a huge sun-protected Government Care Centre. Mandatory uniforms would consist of helmets and bubble-wrap for each child. Taxes would have to go up drastically, but what price can you put on the safety of Toronto’s children? David knows best. Parents would be required to forward their child-tax credit directly to Mr. Miller.

Parental visitation of their growing genetic material would be strictly controlled by the City State, after having passed appropriate blood and urine tests, and proving that their carbon-footprint card for the previous week has been approved by the Green Police.

Sunday non-denominational services would include sermons on ‘inclusiveness’ and compulsory repeated viewings of ‘An Inconvenient Truth’.

It would be a gun-free, peanut-free zone of course.

And a brain-free zone.

But that was the point all along.

* * * *

More at SDA.

Monday Update: Cellphones safe for children: Health Canada - No evidence to support Toronto recommendation (Post) H/T Diogenes Borealis.

I have to give credit to the Kitchener Record for not getting sucked into the Karen Redman vortex of blaming the Federal Government for everything that goes wrong in Canada.

Yesterday in Question Period, Kitchener Liberal MP Karen Redman demanded (updated link):

Mr. Speaker, the crisis in the auto parts industry is getting worse and still the government does nothing. Kitchener Frame announced that it is throwing 1,200 people out of work and this is a huge blow to the Waterloo region

Will the government finally admit that there is a strong role for the federal government? How many good Canadian jobs have to disappear before the government does something about this emergency?

By contrast, the Record points to a variety of factors causing the carnage, including the stubborn stand of the CAW brass which refuses to consider wage cuts (Let’s work to save Kitchener Frame):

…Unfortunately, CAW president Buzz Hargrove has fingered the federal government as Kitchener Frame’s saviour, as if it wields a magic wand that can set everything right. Hargrove should look to his own organization and the company for salvation. The threats facing Kitchener Frame, as well as other auto parts manufacturers, are mainly beyond the federal government’s power to control.

High labour costs, particularly compared to those in similar plants in Mexico, declining demand for the sports utility vehicle frames the company makes, increased transportation costs as well as the high Canadian dollar — these are the series of body blows that have sent Kitchener Frame reeling. Despite having coffers stuffed with billions of taxpayer dollars, the federal government just isn’t rich enough to turn back the global economic and market tides washing over — and away — Canadian industry…

Of course, unions shouldn’t be blamed exclusively either. It is however, a huge factor contributing to the perfect storm that’s tearing the heart out of automobile manufacturing in Ontario.

Karen Redman’s simplistic attitude of demanding that more taxpayer money be thrown at an industry which needs to undergo some serious introspection is disingenuous, irresponsible and only serves to pander to the interests of the buddy of her ex-boss.

Even if Corporate Welfare could be used to save some companies the Record points out, “if it does intervene selectively, who gets saved and who is allowed to perish?”

Instead of trying to score points in QP with useless accusations and pointless questions, perhaps Karen Redman could start addressing the concerns of her constituents with suggestions of realistic methods of helping workers adjust to economics changes that are part of the ebb and flow of life - and to which we must all adapt.

Classic Steyn. Don’t miss it!

…Yet there is no “presumption of innocence” in Section 13 “hate” cases. Au contraire, there is a presumption of guilt, which is why no one hauled before the CHRC under Section 13 has ever been acquitted — with the exception of the “Canadian Nazi Party,” which got off scot-free on the quaint grounds that it did not, in fact, exist. (The fact that Richard Warman, “human rights activist” and the CHRC’s serial plaintiff, is reduced to suing entirely fictional entities tells you a lot about how necessary Section 13 is to the Queen’s peace)

Alas, if you do have the misfortune to exist in what passes for the real world at the CHRC, then your chances of bucking the spectacular 100% conviction rate are a lot slimmer. So Maclean’s and my book will be convicted because that’s the only menu option available. Section 13 and its administration are a public scandal. I hope Canadians will support Dr. Keith Martin, MP, who has introduced a private member’s bill calling for its abolition…

Ivison: Free Speech not just about Nazis. Please read this whole editorial. Very illuminating.

A vous M. Kinsella.

What’s this? Warren’s right to Free Speech has been denied by the National Post? How utterly ironic.

Today’s Globe reiterates what I’ve been hearing from many sources lately - our public health care system is in big trouble (Frustration brews among family doctors). H/T National Newswatch.

Yet the socialists refuse to even consider the possibility of a system that somehow integrates positive aspects of the private sector, such as more competition and innovation.

Where are we headed? Self-care, as suggested by an Ontario doctor who commented here recently? (Related post here with great comments addressing the Maclean’s article referring to the ‘feminization’ of medicine.)

Dr. Fullerton makes the following observation in the comments section of her own blog:

No system is completely transferable to Canada but we could take what has worked. I think that privatization in Sweden probably did not go far enough…ie the ineffective or inefficient providers were not weeded out since most is government funded.

This has become a sacred cow issue, much like abortion or Faith-based education funding. Mention it and you are political dead meat.

And so we continue to stick our collective heads in the sand.

According to the Globe report, the doctor’s groups are asking for the following:

Continue to address the education, training, recruitment and retention of physicians to ensure a sustainable work force that is ready to meet the changing health needs of Canadians;

Implement a co-ordinated, Canada-wide approach to educating, training, recruiting and retaining enough physicians to meet the needs of an aging population.

Fair enough. But where’s the money going to come from?

Time to start thinking outside of the box - rather than end up in one.

Innovative Research Group’s latest poll shows that when it comes to the environment, Canadians don’t want to put their money where their collective green mouth is (Save the Planet, but Not on My Dime).

It seems that we would rather have government and technology to get together and manufacture a painless magic bullet. IRG Director Greg Lyle explains:

“The biggest thing is the secret hope that a lot of people have that technology is going to come to the rescue and that someone is going to invent an answer that won’t cost us very much or inconvenience us very much. They’re looking for a lowcost … solution that doesn’t place heavy demands on us. And, they believe it’s out there.”

Ann Rowan, a spokeswoman with the David Suzuki Foundation, yesterday “downplayed the findings of the poll because such tools do little to address the opportunities for change, she said.”

We are so shallow.