What’s in a Name

Share this post:

 

Obituary information for Rose Flores“A rose by any other name would would smell as sweet.”  Or the well-known, “If it walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, it must be a duck.” And how would our perception be swayed if we changed the name of “Rape and Pillage Project Management Corporation” to “Strawberry Fields Forever ULC”?

Now, if a company is called Greenfields Farms Lid. you would be forgiven if you thought it was an organization devoted to farming and sustainable food production. Alas, this fictional company is owned by an ambitious developer and is a landholding and development company with no attachment at all to agricultural endeavours. If it looks like a scam, and it hides in doublespeak like a scam, it must be a scam.

The owners of Greenfields Farms Ltd. are obviously very successful and wealthy businesspersons, able to donate tens, even hundreds of thousands of dollars to  local politicians and charitable causes. They may even have their family names on medical centres or libraries or food banks for at risk families. These charitable endeavours would have cost millions, expenses that , fortunately for the philanthropic developer, can often be claimed for tax breaks.

When you hear a politician suspected of being too close to a wealthy developer say, “Mr. Doofensmertz makes financial donations to all political parties, and has contributed generously to our community’s charities and community groups, as well as to private political fundraising events.”  Why, when we hear this, we’re more than happy to stop our protests against Doofensmertz and Company’s plan to clear-cut our heritage forests.

When you look up Greenfields Farms Ltd., or any similar greenwashing company, on Google, it’s AI will tell you the “family” who runs the company will often be listed as “Philanthropists and Developers”  … go ahead, try the search on any company you may suspect is pulling the wool over your community’s eyes.

The deceptive headline would read: “Ms. Flim-Flam, a philanthropist and developer, denies any allegations that she has been bribing public officials. ‘I donate equally to all political parties,’ declared Ms. Flim-Flam

Note that “philanthropist” comes first in that descriptor. It creates a halo of goodness around the negative traits often associated with developers and their numbered or quaintly named companies. I confess, I have never used Google AI before so it was fascinating how quickly it cut through the BS (much like Prime Minister Mark Carney’s speech in Davos) and informed me with cool robotic logic that:

Philanthropy can act as a cover for ill-gotten wealth when it is used strategically to sanitize a donor’s reputation, shield assets from taxation, or exert undue influence to protect the immoral or illegal business practices that generated the wealth in the first place. This phenomenon, often referred to as “reputation laundering” or “impact washing,” allows individuals to appear benevolent while obscuring the source of their funds. 

I was shocked! How could AI so coldly smear some developers and their philanthropic gifts with such allegations of impact washing and ways of obscuring the sources and amounts of their wealth. Shame! It’s a good thing none of the politicians or developers operating in our little Town are guilty of reputation laundering.

However, as my old Dad used to say, “Son, sometimes when it looks like a cat, it’s really a skunk.”  And if it smells like a corpse flower, it’s probably not a rose.

The way I see it.

*****

*image, fittingly, from Maxwell P. Dunne Funeral Services

 

 

What’s the Rush?

Share this post:

Some members of Caledon Town Council are in quite a rush to pass a new fill By-law for the Town. However, those same Councillors are not so keen to have legitimate public understanding of or informed input into the final version of that law. It is but another example of “developer influenced” democracy in the Town of Caledon.

Consider that a public meeting and Open House to review a new By-law dealing with procedural issues is being given five hours for presentation and discussion time. The new fill By-law, which will impact the health of Caledon for decades, is being given a two hour Open House presentation and discussion window. Someone is stacking the deck.

The Town has admitted that the urgency to pass the new By-law is being done “to accommodate a prominent developer.” The same developer for whom Premier Ford was going to change the route of the proposed 413  highway to benefit one of the developer’s projects. It seems that the philanthropic developer from Vaughan, Mr. Nicholas Cortellucci is the driving force behind Council’s rush to change the fill By-law.

The object of  his desire, in this case, is the property known locally as Swan Lake located at 0 Shaw’s Creek Road/519 Charleston Sideroad. Despite Ontario policies protecting water bodies from receiving waste soil, the developer and some members of the Caledon Town Council think it’s OK to change Caledon’s fill By-laws to allow this to happen quickly.

No, it’s not OK. It is a perversion of democracy and a betrayal of promises made to protect Caledon’s environment and greenspaces, to reduce dangerous truck traffic, and to listen to the voices of your constituents. The very successful and wonderfully philanthropic Mr. Cortellucci does not deserve to have his name dragged through the mud just because some members on Town of Caledon Council picked the wrong Lake to try to fill with waste soil.

Increase the Open House time, increase the question and answer time for this By-Law, and bring back participatory democracy.

Once upon a time our Strong Mayor, Annette Groves, said: “As part of Pits to Parks, the town would like CVC (Credit Valley Conservation Authority) to consider investigating the potential acquisition of the property at 0 Shaw’s Creek Road/519 Charleston Sideroad given this property’s proximity to the Pinchin Pit,”

Yep, time to reconsider. The way I see it.

The Swan and The Developer

Share this post:

Many of us will remember one of the most riveting short stories we read in high school, “The Lady or the Tiger” written by Frank R, Stockton in 1882, but published in almost every collection of short stories read by students in the coming decades. Why?

Because …Summary, Review and Reflection: The Lady or the Tiger by Frank Stockton – THINK . WRITE . INSPIRE

… the ending created such a quandary for students that we debated it for months. The story basically centres around a King who held absolute authority over his lands. He had a way of determining justice by placing the accused in an arena filled with an engaged and excited public. The arena had two doors on the side opposite the King, Behind one door stood a beautiful youth, behind the other a starving tiger. One either became wed or devoured depending on their choice,

The King discovers that the Queen has been visited by a handsome youth, and hears rumours that they are in love. The King has the young man arrested and taken to the arena.

Bear with me now because this story affects the future of Swan Lake.

Once upon a time there was a Strong Mayor who dealt out decisions in their Council Chambers with a public audience. The decision facing their Council this month was to choose between two doors. Behind one was a Swan living in a beautiful lake and lush ecosystem; behind the other was  a Developer with trucks and construction fill to destroy the lake.

Now, in the original story, the Queen knows behind which door they both are waiting, the lady and the tiger. She is torn between her desire to see her loved one live and her jealousy that he will wed another. On the other hand, she is horrified by the thought of seeing him torn apart by the tiger. Her lover glances up at her and with the slightest gesture she indicates the door to her right.

Without hesitation he walks to the door and opens it. So, what door did she choose, the Lady or the Tiger? And the story ends. WTF? We debated her decision for weeks.

Caledon Council will soon walk into an arena filled with an engaged and excited public. Behind one door awaits The Swan. Behind the other door awaits a hungry Developer. The Swan represents the promises the Mayor made to protect the communities greenspaces, The Developer represents destruction and greed.

So which door will the Council choose? For which door will the Mayor cast a Strong Vote? The Mayor glanced to the door of their choice, The Councillors all saw the glance. Now they each had to make a choice.

And so I leave it with all of you: Which came out of the opened door,  — The Swan, or The Developer?

Stand on Guard?

Share this post:

The formerly petulant, provocative, partisan, populist Pierre Poilievre is back, and the leopard hasn’t changed its spots. Ridden on a rail out of Ottawa for his support of the insurrectionist Truckers’s Convoy and its occupation of the Capital, Mr. Poilievre was banished by Ottawa voters.

Enter the good ultra Conservatives from Alberta, who gave up a justly won seat by Damien Kurek, a well respected member of the Battle River-Crowfoot community, so that Poilievre could win a by-election. Yep, not even the Long Ballot could stop the shamed Poilievre from winning a seat in rural south eastern Alberta. He has now earned the moniker Parachute Pierre.

In the U.S.A. they would call him a carpetbagger, and it didn’t take him long to revert to the same populist Republican playbook that cost the Conservatives the last election. Sloganeering, innuendo insults, the blame game, the staged photo ops – nothing has changed. Prime Minister Mark Carney could have held off the by-election much longer, but he acted with integrity. Poilievre has responded by thanking him with populist slogans like “Axe the Carbon Tax 2.0”  and “Jail not bail”

Parachute Pierre used to blame all of Canada’s ills on Justin Trudeau. With Prime Minister Carney in charge, Poilievre now simply targets “The Liberals” as the source of all evil. At a recent photo op in Brampton, close to the riding of Brampton North-Caledon Liberal MP Ruby Sahota (the actual Secretary of State for Combating Crime) Mr. Poilievre announced his “Stand on Guard” law.

While gaslighting a Brampton family as his backdrop, Poilievre announced “After ten years of Liberals, the system treats victims like criminals and criminals like victims.” Nonsense. This all relates to a home invasion where the perpetrator, the criminal, was incapacitated by the homeowner, the victim, who was subsequently charged with assault. Note, None of the details of the assault were released, which leads one to wonder why Parachute Pierre leapt to the defense of the homeowner.

The police made the assault charge, indicating that they thought the amount of force used to stop the intruder was unreasonable. Mr. Poilievre finds this offensive. Under Canadian law we are allowed to stop any intruder/attacker with reasonable force. That means that once the attacker/intruder has been neutralized either through a de-escalation talk or by a physical response, that you stop applying force. But Parachute Pierre wants no limits to the force you apply to stopping an intruder. “The use  of force, including lethal force is presumed to be reasonable against an individual who unlawfully enters a house and poses a threat to anyone inside.” This is a close copy of Florida’s “Stand Your Ground” law that allows you to shoot and possibly kill anyone “invading” your property.

Think of Rodney King. Think of Dudley George. Think of the death of Sammy Yatim by police officer James Forcillo – way beyond excessive force. Now think of the North York van attack by Alek Venassian, who wanted “death by cop” but was calmed down by Officer Kenny Lam. There are choices.

Caledon MP Kyle Seeback appears to be echoing the same sentiments when he recently claimed, “Soft on crime Liberal laws are having Canadians living in fear.” Whoa, slow down there, Mr. Seeback. My family is not living in fear, except for the truck traffic in Caledon. You seem to forget that the “soft on crime” bail system in Canada is a partnership between the federal and provincial governments. Bail rights are protected by the Canadian  Constitution. I am not living in fear, YOU are creating a crisis.

In the press statement from your website, you added that “Under Mark Carney’s Liberal Government, repeat violent offenders are being released onto our streets, families are paying the price while the system keeps giving second third and even fifth chances to dangerous criminals'”  I think you need to slow down a little Mr. Seeback and first talk with fellow Conservative, the Honourable Zee Hamid, Ontario MPP on bail reform, as well as your your colleague in Ottawa, neighbour Ruby Sahota, our “Crime and Punishment” mentor.

You are right about one thing – Canadians do need to feel safe in their homes and secure in the knowledge that the reasonable use of force to defend one’s self and family from uninvited intruders, will remain protected by our Constitution,

Sadly Kyle, based on your ten years of blame game chatter, and Mr. Poilievre’s lifetime spouting of prickly propaganda, I doubt if the Conservatives will be much help.

The way I see it.

 

A Brief History of the 413

Share this post:

Once upon a time in Ontario, way back in 2002, a Premier named Michael Deane Harris was promoting what he called “A Common Sense Revolution.” Part of that common sense was recognizing that very wealthy and influential developers have lots of money to grease the wheels of industry and fill political war chests.

So, in order to help them boost the value of their lands in north Brampton and south Caledon, Mike and his friends came up with the concept of the GTA East West Economic Corridor. This was the birth of what would become the proposed 413 highway. The original concept morphed into the GTA West Corridor, until the plan was canned by the Kathleen Wynne Liberal government.

Enter Doug Ford and his cohort of developers who still want to boost the value of their lands. Now we have the proposed 413 Highway and extension that originally was intended to connect to Guelph, and Kitchener-Waterloo with their universities. That was shortened to become a route that would link Vaughan to Caledon through Brampton to Halton Hills.

The most recent “developer influenced” request to reroute the 413 in order to boost the value of  his lands came straight to Premier Ford and he said, “Yes.” Then he got caught with his hand in the cookie jar (AGAIN) and in a recent press conference had to admit to his misdemeanour and go back to the pre- developer influenced plan for the proposed 413. And right beside him, in his public admission of the developer influencers, was the Mayor of Caledon, “bang on” in agreement with the Premier, according to him.

Also witnessing this spectacle  was Conservative MPP Sylvia Jones, she who was an absentee landlord during the Covid epidemic, claiming that this would provide more time for families to be together. Well, the studies are mixed on whether or not the proposed 413 extension will provide any gridlock relief whatsoever. Sylvia, your warm and fuzzy family time stories may make good optics, but they have no basis in reality. Your story has no plot. You are selling a pipe dream, and no dream catcher in the world will help you when the public wakes up.

Dear constituent, you are being fed one of the biggest lies of the decade, next to Donald Trump being the Second Coming. “We are building this highway to help reduce your travel time, and increase your family time, and prevent gridlock. Actually, if I must be truthful Ontario, we, your government, are promoting this proposed highway so that friends of mine can make a whole lot of money.” Quote from an unnamed Ontario Conservative politician who can neither  confirm nor deny that they were part of this interview.

And that’s just the tip of the “developer influenced” iceberg. The way I see it.