About last night

My visit to Toronto happened to coincide with the Annual General Meeting of PEN Canada last night, so I popped by. I was impressed with the size of the meeting, and I learned that they have more than 1,000 members across the country. A large part of the meeting was listening to reports about journalists and other writers around the world who have been persecuted for speaking out. What impressed me was that PEN Canada, unlike other NGOs, wasn't shy about tackling censorship in countries that are politically fashionable.

We heard a report about freedom of speech in Cuba -- a country whose state fascism is ignored by too many Canadians who would prefer to think of that country as a cheap holiday destination, rather than an island prison. (The Communist law under which many Cuban writers are detained is called "social dangerousness". Sounds like there's some cross-pollination of ideas with Canada's human rights commissions.)

I was deeply impressed with the presentation of Sheng Xue, a Chinese freedom activist, who read a touching poem about Tiananmen Square. But she didn't just talk about that butchery; she gave many examples of current persecution of political dissidents, listing writers serving prison terms of up to 25 years for the crime of speaking out. Too many commentators have turned a blind eye to that tyranny, preferring to be dazzled by China's economic growth, or the looming Olympics.

Xue didn't just talk about persecution back home; she detailed the troubling phenomenon of Chinese agents in Canada issuing threats of violence against activists right here in Canada, like herself, who speak out against China's bullying. That's not just China's shame -- it's to Canada's discredit that we allow foreign agents to bring their own censorship into our country.

I had a chance to say hello to some people there, who were alive to the domestic threats to free speech posed by Canada's human rights commissions. Chris Waddell of the CBC gave a report to the meeting about HRCs, highlighting their arrogant presumption to censor their fellow citizens. He gave an excellent summary of their procedural flaws, too, from their lack of uniformity, lack of procedures, lack of rules of evidence, lack of jurisprudence, lack of expertise, etc.

I had a chance to chat with him, and to shake hands with John Ralston Saul, PEN Canada's honourary patron, who clearly takes a hands-on role with PEN.

I left impressed with the group. They are clearly idealists, and though many of them had strong personal political views, they approached the issue of free speech, both domestically and internationally, in a non-partisan manner. There were no politically correct exemptions for the countries of the world that are the pets of the UN and much of the world's media.

I'm proud to have bought a membership.

Last night, I also managed to squeeze in an appearance on CTV's Mike Duffy Live, to talk about Stephane Dion's new carbon tax proposals.

I'm naturally opposed to new taxes, especially taxes so opportunistically excused as being "for the environment". That won't shock folks who have read my skeptical book, Fight Kyoto. But what was startling was how difficult the Liberal pundit, Joe Jordan, found it to make the pitch for Stephane Dion's tax.

It was fun to see the NDP pundit criticizing the tax -- that's rare. It was exciting to hear from her just how unpopular B.C.'s provincial version of Dion's tax is (60% opposed; 50% strongly opposed).

But what struck me was how poorly the federal Liberals have written their sales pitch. Put aside any of my criticisms, and the NDP's. Focus on Jordan's own "positive" message: when he was going on the offensive, when he was in sales mode, when he was making his best pitch, he was talking about the "pain" he was going to bring Canadians. He was talking about forcing Canadians to modify their "behaviour". And those were the benefits of his new tax!

Can you imagine how that will sell on the doorsteps in an election?

Knock knock.

Hello. Who are you?

I'm Stephane Dion's Liberal candidate in your neighbourhood. I've got a great idea -- a new tax on energy.

But energy prices are already very high! Why would you want to raise them?

Well, because we want you to change your behaviour.

What do you mean?

We want you to change how you live -- drive less, have a colder house in winter, a hotter house in the summer, you know. Stop your bad behaviour.

Who the hell are you to tell me that?

Well, look, Stephane Dion says we have to endure some pain. It's either some pain now, or a lot more pain later.

Get lost, creep!

[Door slams shut]

Who was that, honey?

Well, he said he was a Liberal candidate, but I don't believe it. That was probably some Conservative Party dirty trickster.

I'm not sure how that's going to work out. Vote Liberal: Painful new taxes, to change your behaviour.

Here's the video clip. Tell me the above is not an accurate summary of the Liberal pitch.