So the federal government isn’t going to fund Pride. The justification for it is that there are other events that need funding too, and Pride can support itself. That actually sounds reasonable, and it’s the most politically pragmatic reason/excuse you can give, since as much as people want funding for their own events it’s hard to say “And to get it you should take it away from that event.” But in this case, that can’t be seen as valid.
Last year Diane Ablonczy had responsibility for this sort of funding removed after supporting Pride. This removal immediately on the heels of announcing Pride funding was too unlikely to be a coincidence, meaning this was obviously a political issue for the Conservatives. They didn’t want to alienate their social conservatives supporters, and it’s easy to alienate such people when they see people not like them receiving $400,000.
If there had been no such issue last year, this year’s rationale may have to fall into the “Well, fine, I guess that’s reasonable enough” category. But given that this is obviously an issue for the Conservatives, this year’s rationale instead falls into the “bullshit” category. This is simply a governing reactionary party’s abuse of a minority group.
“Last year, Clement said the lion’s share of the marquee program’s funding went to large urban centres, particularly Toronto and Montreal. This year, the major cities were limited to two successful applications, allowing the government to spread the largesse around to smaller centres across the country.”
A dollar spent attracting someone to Toronto or Montreal is going to do a lot more than a dollar spent trying to get someone to visit some small town (I don’t want to pick anywhere specific). Toronto and Montreal are cities people look for a reason to visit. People already know they can go to those cities for world class theatre, galleries, restaurants, sporting events, night clubs, concerts, whatever. So they wait until they think “Hey, why don’t we go for [Pride, Luminato, etc.].” That’s the axis around which their trip will orbit, but it’s far from where they’ll spend all their time. In hypothetical small town, that doesn’t exist.
The declaration came as a surprise, since the Conservative government has so far tried to avoid taking any categorical stand on abortion in its new, foreign-aid focus on maternal health. Repeatedly, for months now, ministers have insisted that the government doesn’t want to reopen a debate that has been hugely divisive in Canada.
Which surprise comes as a surprise to me, since I thought the whole thing was that Harper’s government hasn’t been super scary so long as you don’tlookdifferent.
If you’re keeping tabs of who the federal government hasn’t worked too hard to help, these are a couple good summaries:
AN IMPORTANT MESSAGE FROM FOREIGN AFFAIRS CANADA: ALL CANADIAN CITIZENS TRAVELING ABROAD WHO WISH TO AT SOME POINT RETURN TO CANADA ARE ADVISED NOT TO SOUND TOO MUSLIM-Y (BEING NAMED “MOHAMED” OR ANY VARIANT IS TO BE AVOIDED INVARIABLY) OR TO VISIT A COUNTRY THAT MAY ARREST YOU WILLY-NILLY.
I don’t recall anything special about flying out of Schipol a couple weeks ago.
I do recall that flying there (Amsterdam) from Prague was a new experience for me, in that at no point did I go through any real security with my checked or carry-on baggage, and on the way out we just walked right out into the street without having to talk to anybody.
Another Nigerian man (on the same flight at a different time) was suspected of nefarious activity, though it turns out he was just feeling unwell and wasn’t too happy with being forced to leave the bathroom. Presumably he didn’t want to diarrhea all over his seat.
As assumed, limiting people’s basic freedoms has to cause more problems than it solves.
In Amsterdam, which has a crazy amount of bikers, it seemed pretty much everyone uses a heavy chain lock. I know a good chain held with a good lock is as good as a good u-lock. In Toronto, I see a mix of both types. In Amsterdam, it seemed exclusively chain.
“It” being the inane insanity that is for some reason widely considered acceptable.
Being in Canada I can’t link to Hulu, so know this is from the December 1st episode.
Regarding Dubai:
STEWART
In hindsight, a crash like this seems inevitable. Why didn’t Dubai see it coming?
[cut to CNBC report by Erin Burnett]
BURNETT
[overpronouncing words, being generally condescending towards an entire country in an innocent, racist kind of way]
Over the past few years I would say they were literally, “ebullient,” would be the right word to describe it. You know, keep in mind this country’s only 38 years old, so there was sort of a newness and a naiveté about it.
STEWART
Ahhh, ebullient naiveté. can you show us what that looks like, CNBC’s Erin Burnett, almost exactly two years ago?
[cut to segment on Burj Al Arab hotel in Dubai built on man-made island with eight staff for every room]
STEWART
… Luckily Burnett was on the air that day with someone who wanted to dig deeper.
[cut to Matt Lauer being asked if he had a question]
LAUER
If she could look for the golf ball I hit off that helipad there.
STEWART
Ahhhh, “if she could look for that golf ball I hit off that helipad there.” In the category of sentences you hear at the exact moment that your nation state may be too decadent to survive, that’s got to be right there in between “I want the guest vomitorium redone in venetian marble” and “what is the Matisse doing in my Monet closet?” We’ll be right back.
If a million people voted to create this list, that would be one thing. But arbitrarily having a bunch of reactionary assholes compile a list as a testament to their inability to like anything that looks interesting, that’s not news. Especially not when they can’t even be bothered to attach any decent photos.
I like the Michael Lee-Chin Crystal. It makes sure you don’t look at the museum and catch yourself thinking it should be turned into a Club Monaco. A bit of “what the fuck” is good for a generally plain city.
