Science of the Social Credit Measured in Terms of Human Satisfaction
Christian based service movement warning about threats to rights and freedom irrespective of the label, Science of the Social Credit Measured in Terms of Human Satisfaction

"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing"
Edmund Burke

Science of the Social Credit Measured in Terms of Human Satisfaction

The Biggest Shadow

by Jeremy Lee

The December 20th Christmas issue of the Australian On Target newsletter, carried an article by Jeremy Lee captioned "2002 Draws to a Tumultuous End." Under the above sub-caption, Mr. Lee ended his article as follows:

Hanging over the western world is the ever-growing threat of depression. Despite all the 'whistling-in-the-dark,' the heavyweight economic forecasters are now catching up with reality - and don't like what they see. Max Walsh, writing in the Bulletin, 16/11/02, under the heading Into The Valley of Deflation, told us over two pages how black things appear. The Federal Reserve (privately-owned) has cut interest rates a dozen times over the last few months, the current rate being 1.23%. This, coupled with the $US trillion-plus taxcut introduced by Bush when he gained office, is supposed to stimulate the frantic borrowing binge of a 'new recovery.' But the Business Roundtable, representing America's 200 biggest corporations, has reported that 60 per cent of its members will be shedding workers and staff in the coming year, and 80 per cent there will be (making) no new investment in plant and equipment.
The level of debt in the US economy is now so vast, smeared like an over-thick dollop of butter on every slice of economic activity, that people are refusing to borrow more, no matter what the enticement.
Adding to the predicament is the enormous growth in the Chinese economy, which grew 32% this year. It is moving into every area of production, elbowing aside older, more debt-laden and higher-taxed economies… That's why the Business Roundtable is looking to labour shedding. That always causes concern but especially when you have a household sector carrying a historically high level of debt.

With low levels of household saving and three years of falling equity prices, the capacity of the US consumer to drive that economic growth is at risk. "Should the latest initiative on the monetary front fail to achieve traction, then we could see a quite serious retrenchment of US economy…"

Peter Hartcher, writing from Washington (The-AFR, 9/12/02) provided evidence supporting Walsh's position:
"... the prices received by US firms overall have declined in each of the past five quarters, the longest run in more than 50 years. For the latest quarter they are down 1.3 per cent…" This despite the fact that America's money supply has been expanding by 8 per cent year on year. Under orthodox theory, an expanding money supply is supposed to stimulate the economy. But some are only just beginning to see that if the money supply is increased by 8 per cent, while the ensuing borrowing costs increase by, say, 12 per cent, the policy is not the wisest one to follow. So what happens when printing money no longer entices people to borrow?

Hold your hat for a long slide into Depression. And that's where we all are now. Australia has reduced government debt by shoving it onto the private sector, where household debt is rising in leaps and bounds, and is the highest in our history. This, according to Treasurer Costello, who has raised taxation to the highest point in Australia's history, has made us the strongest economy in the world! So, with the biggest drought in Australia's history, war and terrorism on every horizon, the highest levels of household debt on record, and our welfare agencies facing an ever-growing horde of destitute people who can't afford Christmas dinner, it looks like being a grand festive season. The only bright spot on the horizon is the growing number of aware Australians. Sooner or later the point comes where we've got to start going upwards.
A Merry Christmas to all readers! And a challenging New Year! (End of Mr. Lee's article)

COMMENT: The present American economic situation, in a sense, is a bit of an anomaly: Here we have the greatest producing nation with the largest economy in the world, yet running an annual 'unfavourable trade balance' in the hundreds of billions! The financial centre of the world, materially the 'richest' nation on this planet - and with the largest debt in the world, in the trillions! The question arises: Is the U.S. spending so much on non-essential items and military hardware and personnel, that it's becoming increasingly dependent on foreign markets and the cheap-labour Third World areas to serve its consumer market?
One thing is certain: Under the present financial system, unless Washington soon changes its policy it's going to end up in bankruptcy and tax hikes bigtime rather than tax cuts. Needless to say, when it comes to Debt, Canadians in general are the last ones qualified to pass either advice or judgment! Our public indebtedness is gargantuan, our private debt - mortgages, loans, credit card commitments, etc. - is so high and increasingly unrepayable that bankruptcies are at an unprecedented and escalating level. And we can't solve these Debt problems by going to war!


What has triggered this about-face? The Toronto Sun, Feb. 3, features an editorial by its Editor, Lorrie Goldstein, captioned "UN has been hijacked by the world's worst." Here's an excerpt:

"(Since) the subject of my column last week, I've since done some further research on the UNHRC (U.N. Human Rights Commission) and can report it is perhaps the most inappropriately named body on Earth. "Of the world's nine worst dictatorships as identified by the respected rights-monitoring agency Freedom House, five - Libya, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, Syria and Cuba - are all members of this commission that is ostensibly devoted to human rights. So are China and Russia, respectively responsible for the brutal repression of Tibet and Chechnya, identified by Freedom House as the two least-free territories on Earth.
Zimbabwe - which Freedom House cites as one of the top five setbacks for the cause of world freedom in 2002 under Robert Mugabe's policies of repression, violence, corruption and terror - is also a proud member of the UNHRC.
Of its 53 members, almost 25% are dictatorship. …" Well said, Lorrie, but where have you media people been these past years?

While this Service and other patriotic journals have been pointing out the dangers of transferring our sovereignty and hopes on this UN body, and taking a whipping from the media for our trouble? Is it, as you reveal later in your article, because after all these years this UN committee has finally discovered and is pointing out what the Israelis have been doing to the poor and largely helpless Palestinians they are invading?

Another case in point is the about-face of the media's treatment of Nelson Mandela recently. For years, this former Communist revolutionary in South Africa has been an international icon, idolized by the western world's newsmedia. Yet, recently the same media has begun to disparage him. But why? Could it be his recent concern expressed for the almost genocidal treatment of the Palestinians by the Israeli state? So much for our media. But wait a minute! I'm actually optimistic - I feel that the media's better than it was ten years go!

Then, who is pushing the war train? "TIME magazine asks, 'Which is the greatest threat to world peace? Iraq? North Korea? The US?' They may have been surprised by the hundreds of thousands who responded and are still responding, over 80 per cent of whom replied 'The US'." - Australian On Target, Jan. 24

Flood of Mexican immigrants coming?

The Financial Post, Jan. 27, published a front-page report under the caption "Fox sees more Mexicans moving to Canada." Here are excerpts:

"Mexico's President Vicente Fox hopes that as many as 125,000 Mexicans each year will be able to immigrate to Canada in future or half of Ottawa's annual immigration target. " 'Mexico would gladly like to supply Canada with up to half of that (250,000 annual target). Very gladly,' he said in an exclusive interview with the Financial Post during attendance at the World Economic Forum. 'I was not aware that Canada is bringing in that many immigrants a year. I will take the immigration issue up. It's very, very interesting.' " Since our present intake of 250,000 immigrants includes only a few thousand Mexicans, obviously the major portion of the suggested 125,000 would be in addition to the 250,000 immigrants presently targetted for this year! The report notes that 20 million Mexicans now live in the US, in addition to 3.5 million "illegal Mexican residents."

Be sure to pass your CIS along!

Recently we received from a lady in Quesnel, B.C., the following note: "Please find enclosed the label from my mother's subscription -- (name given). "My mother died Sept. 11/02 - her mail has been forwarded to me and since reading your publication I have found it quite interesting, so have filled out a subscription form for myself and also a friend. "Cheque enclosed. Please cancel my mom's!"

Yes, I knew her mother, who had been a CIS reader for a generation - a wonderful woman! And her daughter's action, I'm sure, would have met with her mother's approval!

The slavering dogs of war

The following item is reprinted from the Australian On Target report of January 17th:

All through 2002 the pressure for war against Iraq, relentlessly pursued by Israel's Likud (party - Ed.) and the club of Zionist-oriented hawks within the US State Department was increased month by month. Looking back, several "D-Days" were canvassed by the media, and people were supposed to accept the inevitability of war. Speed was essential to a successful outcome. But one hitch after another kept postponing an invasion, which allowed time for two things: firstly, more and more information, largely from the Internet, reached the public through chinks and cracks in "official" news coverage; and secondly, in country after country an ever-growing resistance to war began to emerge with, in some cases, huge anti-war demonstrations.
Prime Minister Blair in Britain found the support for his war rhetoric ebbing drastically. President Schroeder in Germany managed to bolster his slipping popularity in the polls by a strong anti-war campaign. Grudgingly, the US was forced to accept a United Nations role and the return of weapons inspectors. But it made it obvious that the outcome would make no difference to its war intentions. So far, a very big team of inspectors with the best technology money can buy has found no sign of "weapons of mass destruction." Presumably, it was briefed, before going to Iraq, on any and all evidence in the files of western powers as to details and locations of suspected weapons.

As 2003 opens, President Bush's finger - or the unseen powers that are holding his hand - is on the biggest arms build-up and troop deployment the world has ever seen. There is enough firepower to blow the Middle East to pieces. The United Nations has warned of an expected 900,000 refugees from any Iraq war to add to the millions already dislocating borders and facilities round the world. Ordinary people are also taking note of the seemingly-different reactions to different countries. Why no threat of a preemptive strike against North Korea, whose nuclear programme is far in advance of Iraq's (if the latter exists at all). North Korea is supplying arms to such countries as Afghanistan and Yemen. Yet, George Bush is conciliatory towards a country with the potential to retaliate. Only the powerless are legitimate military targets it seems. Israel, Pakistan and India, and obviously China, are all capable of nuclear aggression. Yet, no gun is currently pointed in their direction. It is the 'reconstruction' of the Middle East, both in regard to oil and the festering sore of the occupied Palestinian territories, that is really on the drawing board of global war. (End of the On Target item)

COMMENT: That pretty well sums up the past year of Mr. Bush's 'war on terrorism'! We need to remember that the plan for world power and control that the Bush team is following was planned - or 'plotted' - before Mr. Bush was ever elected President. This was revealed first in the British Sunday Herald newspaper (see our November 2002 issue'' article, "Understanding U.S. Politics and Power").

Ernst Zundel arrested

The following report is being written on Wednesday, February 13th.
We have learned through the Internet that Ernst Zundel was arrested by U.S. authorities a week ago at his home in Tennessee, and was whisked away in handcuffs to an unknown destination, which his wife, a day or two later, discovered was a jail an hour's drive away. It seems that Mr. Zundel, who moved from Canada to the U.S. years ago - with his wife, the former Ingrid Rimland, the scholarly author and lecturer, who is an American citizen - has his U.S. social security number, his work permit, is listed in the telephone director and with his wife, owns his home residence. And while he can't find out anything in jail, his wife has learned that he's to be immediately deported to Germany, where a prison sentence awaits him because he has publicly questioned the accuracy of World War II Jewish casualties in Germany, where he was born and raised until moving to Canada at the age of 19. To even question accuracy of the 'Holocaust' six-million figure in Germany is a criminal offence carrying a five-year jail sentence - even if the questioning took place in another country!

That's about all I know from the Internet at this time. But because of Mr. Zundel's background and his much publicized battle in Canada for freedom of speech and his defence of historical revisionism, and the American's vaunted constitutional defence of freedom of speech, his summary deportation from the U.S. could be significant news internationally.
For details, Mrs. Ingrid Zundel's address is 3152 Parkway, Suite 13, PMB 109 Pigeon Forge, TN 37863, USA; her website:; and her e-mail:

We're making some changes
By Ron Gostick

A serious health problem has made a change in our publishing program mandatory, and I want to outline these changes to our subscribers. But first, a little background: This past summer and autumn I noted more than usual tiredness and also a small loss of weight. But I thought this was probably due to a heavy summer and fall work schedule, involving the writing of a major booklet and four long business trips - two to Quebec City and two to Alberta. However, as Christmas approached I lost my appetite and noted a further rather drastic weight loss and also a loss of my normal energy level and 'work ethic'! Also, I was having serious urinary problems. So, a trip to our doctor and hospital and specialist, and tests. Apparently my prostate was blocking my bladder and this was impacting on my kidneys. A catheter was inserted to overcome this problem, with positive results, the return of appetite, energy and five pounds the first two weeks! In the meantime, tests indicated my cancer has spread thoughout my bone structure, and the 'specialist' can't understand my lack of pain and seemingly excellent health! In other words: short-term, I'm coping well with the inconvenience and occasional discomfort of a catheter - and feeling great and ready for battle. But, realistically and long-term, my future health is uncertain and I must cut back my work load and increase my hours of relaxation and rest.
THEREFORE, we are making these changes: Instead of being published monthly as in the past, it will be published only bimonthly (six times a year), composed usually of three sections as at present, but with a fourth section if necessary, and the subscription rate will be $20 a year. We'll not accept subscriptions for longer than one year. Present subscriptions will be extended to the full number of issues paid for. As long as we are able to publish, we intend to.
We intend to continue our literature service, and shall publish a catalogue of all our books as soon as possible.
We also intend to carry on our educational work with thousands of public figures in government, newsmedia, etc., by way of strategic mailings. I'm sorry to have to scale back our publishing service, but age seems to finally catch up and slow us down a bit. But, Lord willing, we've got a lot of constructive work to do yet for our supporters and our nation, and I hope you'll be with us to the end.

Vol. 53 - No 2 Supplementary Section No. 1 February, 2003

Constitution versus Charter of Rights

Last September a conference on the theme "The Battle for Accountable and Constitutional Government," was held in Quebec City under the joint sponsorship of The 'Third Option' for National Unity Committee and The Canadian Constitution Committee. Luc Gagnon, a learned scholar who studied Law in Canada and Europe, addressed this conference on our Canadian constitutional situation. Following, are excerpts from his brilliant address:

Since 1982, the Constitution of Canada has been underminded by the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Pierre Elliott Trudeau, the architect of the repatriation of the Canadian Constitution, had dreamt of this Charter of Rights since his studies at Harvard University where, according to him, he discovered real democracy. For him, there was no democracy without a Charter of Rights, according to the French and American models. In fact, there was no liberty for him without a Charter of Rights. This is, of course, a fundamental mistake of political philosophy. The most totalitarian regimes were born in the name of a philosophy of Rights. Just think of the Terror under the French Revolution and the Bolshevik regime in the defunct USSR. Trudeau identified monarchy with a lack of liberty, but he never tried to create a republic of Canada for political reasons.

Long before Trudeau, the monarchist Charles Maurras demonstrated that France under the Kings was "hérissée de libertés" (Full of liberties), real and local liberties, whereas the jacobinistic France of Robespierre was totally centralized and the only liberty remaining was to obey the enlightened dictator (who was himself following the Godess Reason). The best representation of that tyranny was the martyrdom of the Carmelite nuns of Compiègne who were killed because they wanted to live together under the rule of their community: "there is no liberty for the enemy of the liberty."
There was liberty only for those who control the state, for those who control the definition of liberty.

In the middle of the Eighteenth Century, Jean-Jacques Rousseau in his Contract Social paved the way for this modern despotism: according to Rousseau, the citizen must renounce and alienate his will for the common will of the society (which should not be confused with common good). There is no difference in that system between individual morality and the morality of the community, which is politics.

Many Quebecers condemned Trudeau in 1982 for having repatriated the Canadian Constitution without the consent of Quebec and its then-Premier René Lévesque. In 1988, Brian Mulroney and Robert Bourassa tried with the Meech Lake Agreement to reintegrate Quebec into the Canadian family, but the Indians and Clide Wells killed the agreement. Today, Quebec is still formally outside the constitutional order of Canada. Quebec nationalists, however, have never mentioned the harmful addition of the Charter of Rights to the Constitution in their criticisms of the 1982 constitutional coup. In fact, they are themselves defenders of a jacobinistic model of government.
The PQ government under René Lévesque adopted a Charter of Rights in 1977, before Canada did.

Some political commentators sometimes complain about judge-run government in Canada, but they never criticize the cause of this situation: Trudeau's 1982 Charter of Rights and Freedoms which is considered as a sacred cow. This Charter is perhaps even worse than the 1969 Trudeau omnibus bill that decriminalized abortion, legalized divorce and de-penalized homosexuality. The setting of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms in the Canadian Constitution was the destruction of Canada. It was a foreign body in the Canadian constitutional framework which was based on Common law and the British tradition.

I would like in this short presentation to illustrate the disastrous consequences of this Charter of Rights in three recent important questions: the definition of marriage, the school rights of Christians in Canada and the protection of unborn children.

The definition of marriage Last July 12, Ontario Divisional Court ruled that the opposite sex nature of marriage in the current common law, which states that marriage is "the union of one man and one woman," violates Section 15 of the equality provision of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. On September 5, the Quebec Superior Court ruled in the same way that the traditional definition of marriage is unconstitutional. In both cases, the Charter of Rights is used to destroy matrimonial law in Canada. The Charter is considered superior to the Constitution and interprets the law in Canada. As long as we accept this premise, we will lose all our fights in defence of traditional values in Canada. The Quebec Superior Court Judge Louise Lemelin, with the Charter of Rights as an arm, can say anything against the traditional definition of marriage: "secularization of marriage forces legislators to consider that the institution is civic and cannot be defined just by religion."
Marriage has never been a purely religious or Christian institution. The Catholic Church has always recognized the validity of a marriage contracted between two pagans. Marriage existed even before the foundation of the Church. Judges can impose their decadent prejudices on the society in the name of the Charter of Rights, or in the spirit of the Charter of Rights. Is this democracy? It is their democracy, the democracy of decadence, of anti-Christian forces. We refuse to obey this democracy.

Since the French Revolution, the democracy of the Charter of Rights has always been, as pointed out by Edmund Burke in his Considerations on French Revolution, an oligarchy and plutocracy. The Charter of Rights has always been an instrument to manipulate the people and their morality. The great Chesterton showed that real democracy is essentially traditional, but with the democracy of the Charter of Rights it becomes an instrument to destroy the national tradition. It is not then, a system that designates the citizens who will exercise political authority in the society, but an ideological system to destroy the traditional foundations of society. Either we follow the natural and Christian law, or we follow the revolutionary Charter of Rights. No compromise is possible.

On the grounds of the Charter of Rights, Christians will lose the battle. Canada is a Christian country, has a Christian tradition. It is not a country of Buddhist or Moslem tradition; it is a country of Christian tradition and our law must take this into account. Why is it that Saudi Arabia or Iran can exist as confessional states? If we do not affirm clearly our Christian national identity, Canada, and the Western World, will lose the battle against the Moslem countries and will disappear.

The school rights of Christians In the Charter of Rights adopted in 1982, the Christian schools were not directly threatened because Article 93 of the Constitution was officially recognized in the Charter. However, the philosophy of the Charter was clearly opposed to Article 93 which gives special rights to Catholic and Protestant parents. The Charter is opposed to all kinds of special rights for Christians since it is essentially universal: rights for everybody or no rights for anybody, which is often the same thing. The formal recognition of Article 93 in the Charter shows precisely that this article could be judged unconstitutional in regards to the Charter. The anti-Christian activists, or the so-called rights activists, would not accept those constitutional rules and would eventually fight against the constitutional rights in the name of the philosophy of the Charter of Rights. The Bouchard and Chretien governments would agree for once in 1997 to modify Article 93 of the Canadian Constitution in order to dismantle the Christian school system in the Province of Quebec. Prime Minister Chretien was proud to say that this was proof that Canadian federalism was working. It really does work; it kills Christianity, Quebec and Canada.

Having lost their constitutional school rights in 1997, Quebec Christians lost their Christian schools just three years later in 2000 with Bill 118. That bill bluntly abolished all Christian schools, Protestant and Catholic, in Quebec. The naive Quebec bishops had said in 1997 that the Constitution and constitutional rights do not matter, Catholic schooling is important. We can now see the results of this wilful blindness. Again, the Charter of Rights was used by atheist, liberal and Masonic leaders to show the discriminatory character of Christian schools.

The Proulx Commission, formed by the Quebec government wrote a report in 1999 that tried to demonstrate the incompatibility between the spirit of the Charter of Rights and the existence of public Christian confessional schools. This report is the best illustration of the soft totalitarianism in which we live today. At the beginning it affirms that the only political philosophy conceivable today is "liberal democracy" and the Charter of Rights which are the new Ten Commandments. It is truly what the Charter is today. We, Christians, cannot accept it. Our political philosophy is based on the real Ten Commandments given by God to Moses: they are the fundamental charter of our society.

Amongst the Ten Commandments, the fourth respect and piety for our parents and our fatherland, is particularly important for the construction of the city. The faith of our Fathers was Christian and we shall stay faithful to it, in our private life and in our public life. God must reign in our hearts, in families and in society. Christian public schools have their rights in a Christian country.

Rights of the unborn children The best proof of the hypocrisy of this Charter is the absence of rights for the most vulnerable human beings in Canada. We see clearly that modern rights are more a question of power than a question of real and objective rights. The unborn children who cannot defend themselves in the womb of their mothers have no rights in Canada. Pierre Elliott Trudeau is the father of abortion in Canada, which is ironic since he was considered the great defender of rights. In 1969 with the disastrous omnibus bill, the Liberal government opened the door to abortion. Abortion was permitted for women's health reasons in Section 251 of the Criminal Code. After a long fight, Henry Morgentaler got a decision of the Supreme Court in 1988 that created a complete void in Canadian legislation. The Court then declared that Section 251 of the Criminal Code was contrary to Section 7 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms which reads: "Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of the person and the right not to be deprived thereof except in accordance with the principles of human justice." Of course, the Charter prevailed again against the real rights, the rights of unborn children.
The Mulroney government introduced Bill C-43 in 1988 to fill the void but it was defeated in the Senate in 1991. This bill would have reintroduced abortion into the Criminal Code, but the restrictions imposed were meaningless. This is what the great defenders of human rights have offered us so far for the protection of unborn children in Canada.

Of course, the opportunistic Jean Chretien has never tried to introduce any legislation about abortion so as not divide his caucus and to avoid threatening his fragile hold on power, a power based on censure and lies. The real natural law is based on commandments that generate objective rights. In the case of abortion, it is the commandment "Thou shalt not kill" that should protect objectively the unborn children and the life of all innocent Canadians (young and old). This right to life should be obvious and should be protected by a provision of the Criminal Code. But in our decadent Western World, there is a need to enshrine that right to life of the unborn children in the Constitution.

If there are real rights, the first right is the right to life. We must also extend this right to the old people who are threatened by the defenders of "Quality of life." Is there a quality of life without life? I propose that the Canadian Constitution should formally include as the first element the right to life for all Canadians from conception until natural death. When we recognize this right in our Constitution, Canada will again become a country of rights and life, a country faithful to its Creator. It will be on its way to re-discover its Christian identity far from the falsehood of the Charter of.Rights, the poisonous gift of Pierre Elliot Trudeau.

Clearly, the first step to return to our Christian tradition as a nation is to extract the Charter of Rights from our Constitution and to restore the real rights based on the divine and natural law, and firstly the right to life for the unborn children.

Constitutional Proposal We announced last fall the reprinting by the Canadian Constitution Committee of its Constitutional Proposal for Canada. This second printing includes a few minor changes and one or two small omissions from the original printing. It also includes on its attractive cover, in full colour, the provincial flags of every province and territory in Canada. Following, are a few notes on some of its major changes from our present BNA Act/Charter of Rights constitution.

Senate: Instead of the present practise by which the Prime Minister selects and appoints the Senators,they would be elected every fourth year for an 8-year term (half coming up for re-election every fourth year). And there would be 4 Senators for each province and 2 for each of our three Territories. This is similar to the U.S. system, and protects smaller provinces from being pushed around and completely dominated by a minority of more heavily populated provinces.

Governor-General: Instead of the present practise by which the Prime Minister selects the Governor-General (the Crown's representative ) and presents him to the Queen for appointment, a committee of all provincial Premiers together would select and present for the Queen's assent, a nominee for the office of Governor-General.

Privy Council: Instead of being appointed by the Prime Minister, it would be appointed by the Governor-General, after consultation and advice from the Premiers, and shall include at least one member from each province and territory.

Lieutenant Governors: The Governor-General, after consultation with his Council and Premiers, appoint from amongst the citizens of each province and territory, a Lieutenant Governor for each one.

Education: Exclusively a provincial jurisdiction, would be more parent-oriented and controlled, with a voucher system, but provincial governments responsible for curriculum and financing.

Supreme Court: Today judges of this court are appointed by the Prime Minister. The Canadian Constitution 2000 Proposal on this question reads as follows: "The Supreme Court of Canada shall be comprised of Eleven Members, One from each Province and One from the Territories combined ... "A Quorum for Supreme Court sittings shall be Seven Members. "
Candidates for appointment to the Supreme Court... shall first appear before an All-Party Parliamentary Committee comprised of Senators and Members of the House of Commons, for questioning concerning their Qualifications, following which the Governor-General, after consultation with said All-Party Committee and his Council, shall appoint at his Discretion, the new Members of the Court."

Property Rights: Unequivocally protected in Proposed Constitution.

Justice: "No Committee, Tribunal, Taskforce, or any other Government Agency, other than those Courts established by the Grace of the Crown, may pass Judgement or Sentence."

Sovereignty: "The Parliament and Government of Canada shall have all Powers necessary or proper for exercising its Jurisdiction in Foreign Policy and External Relations; but under no circumstances shall the Federal Government, or its Agencies make any Treaty or Agreement, or take any Action, that would in any way diminish Canada's National Sovereignty or Provincial Jurisdiction, without first holding a National Referendum on such matter, and the Citizens' Verdict in such case shall Prevail and be Binding upon the Federal Government.

Initiative Referenda: A system of Initiative Referendum and Recall, along lines outlined, would be instituted to ensure more accountability in government.

These are a few of the constructive points of the Proposed Revised and Updated Canadian Constitution. Be sure to get a copy -- $8 ppd. Those who bought a copy of its first printing, have an automatic $3 credit, and need only enclose $5.

Enterprise Report Vol. 53 - No. 2 Supplementary Section No. 2 February, 2003

The Battle Lines Are Forming
by Ron Gostick

Our December issue included an item captioned "Good news for Canada," relating the story of The Report magazine's campaign to change itself into a "foundation" dedicated to promoting constructive change in Canadian society. Following, is a front-page article by The Report magazine's December 16th issue by its Editor-Publisher Link Byfield.

"Our campaign succeeded, and we have launched the Citizens Centre for Freedom and Democracy" "As the year 2002 winds to a close, I should report how we are faring with the project I wrote about in our October 21 edition. At that time, we established the Report Foundation, to save this magazine financially, to reorganize ourselves as a non-profit enterprise and to move in a more constructive direction.

"The response to our appeal for donations has been enormous, far exceeding our expectations. We were (as we so often are) unprepared for what we had started, and are only now catching up. Donations, questions and messages continue to arrive, but our own replies and letters of thanks have at last been sent out, and I have answered almost all the individual e-mails and letters that have come my way. Our new foundation will start with over 3,000 members, each having made an initial contribution averaging over $100. I cannot adequately express my gratitude. It has got us off to a powerful start.

"But what have we started? The name 'Report Foundation' was (as we explained two months ago) temporary. Our new non-profit will be named the Citizens Centre for Freedom and Democracy. The CCFD (or Citizens Centre, for short) will promote individual initiative and personal responsibility, limited government, free markets, open democracy, and the fundamental rights of life, free speech, religion and property. The Citizens Centre will own the magazine, and will involve itself as well in advocacy, research, training and Charter litigation. "(I should mention that the legal work for this transition is still in progress, and is actually fairly complex. I should also mention that the certificates and plaques we promised our founding supporters will be produced as soon as we have settled on a logo for the organization. And lastly, I should clarify that although the Citizens Centre is legally a 'nonprofit,' it may be too political in nature to be classified as 'charitable' under Canadian tax law. However, we hope in future to register a charitable wing for research and training purposes.)

"Though The Report will continue its regular twice-monthly publication, readers will start seeing changes in the coming year. In most editions, several pages will be set aside for news about Citizens Centre projects and developments. In addition, once a month we will include a large special Policy Report as background on a particular public issue, such as Kyoto, aboriginal reforms, promiscuity problems, defence, immigration and the interference of government in private life and private property. The point of these special reports will be to arm people with facts and ideas that can bring about positive change.

"However, it is plain that the overriding concern of our supporters in all parts of the country is to check the power of two national institutions. One is the office of the prime minister and the other is the Supreme Court of Canada. People are militant about many other things as well, but these two top the list by a wide margin.
"The difficulty with reforming either institution, however, is that they have spent the past half-century locking in their excessive and abusive power. Almost all other authorities and influences in the country - universities, town councils, media, churches, political parties, professional associations, industries and charities - have submitted and adapted themselves to the twin tyranny of the PMO and the SCC. Parliamentarians and premiers complain about it on occasion, but have rarely fought back.

"What's needed is a popular revolution. Existing institutions are of almost no help, because they have grown hostile to freedom and democracy, or they lack sufficient credibility. The only recourse left is to appeal directly to the citizenry as such, to activate and organize them on a scale that has not been seen in Canada since the populist movements of the 1920s. It is the task of the Citizens Centre, working with like-minded organizations, to help bring this mass mobilization to pass.

"Our initial step will be to convene Western Assembly II. It will occur about one year from now, probably in Calgary. Unlike the Western Assembly that Preston Manning convened in Vancouver in 1987, the aim this time is not to launch a new party. There are enough parties already, with plenty of good people in them. What's needed now is a widespread movement of the citizenry acting at all levels to regain control of their country.

"Any nation, any people, which lacks meaningful control over the drafting and enforcement of its own laws is not self-governing, is not democratic and is not free. The Western Assembly for National Solutions will examine and select the best available strategies for establishing citizen control of our legislatures, courts and constitution.

"Not being an expert in these matters myself, I'm pleased to announce that University of Calgary political scientist Ted Morton, one of Alberta's two senators-elect, has agreed to help. Together, we'll be assembling a working committee to move this ahead. "If you'd like to attend the Western Assembly, stay tuned. Like the first one, it may well prove to be a nation-changing event, with speakers from across Canada and from other countries. We hope to announce by February the location and date, the agenda and decision-making process, and the registration fee. And if you have any ideas you think should be included, please propose them to me at the e-mail address below.

"Canadians today can make two mistakes, both fatal. One is to go on pretending nothing is seriously wrong. There is plenty wrong - we have never in our history been so badly governed. But the other lethal error is to assume that the country is down the toilet. It isn't. We have enormous advantages and resources. We just have to start using them." (End of Link Byfield's article)

COMMENT: Just note Link Byfield's main points for now - I'll refer to them later.
TED BYFIELD, Link's father, the founder of The Report magazine, and widely respected as the finest and most influential journalist in the West, in the next Report issue after Link's article - i.e., in the Jan. 6th issue - wrote the following article:

Irrefutable lesson from Kyoto: the West is doomed unless it's ready to get out "As the year 2002 winds down, it's interesting to look back and see what happened to the world generally, to Canada particularly, and to western Canada most particularly. "The event that most engaged the world was the emergence, undisguised, of another great religious war. As such, of course, this will have to be followed in our Orthodoxy column as it develops. The most significant event in Canada was the emergence and attendant problems of a prime minister apparently gone berserk. And one consequence of this has been the year's most significant political event in the West: namely, the first decisive defeat of Alberta Premier Ralph Klein.

"The ongoing extravaganza at Ottawa is absolutely without precedent. True, we have previously had prime ministers slip somewhat out of focus, but the operative word is 'slip.' It happened quietly, unobtrusively, and came to be widely known only years later. But the Chretien phenomenon is playing out centre stage, in front-page headlines and on television. The bull has gone wild in the china shop for all the world to see - or, at any rate, such of the world as is interested.

"Largely unobserved, however, was the unfortunate upshot in Alberta of this performance. Five or more years ago, when the Kyoto insanity was first proposed, Ralph Klein was obviously assured by someone he trusted at Ottawa (probably Paul Martin) that Canada would never ratify the treaty. For at least four years, this appeared to be true. Kyoto was endlessly examined and discussed. Its cost to Canadian industry was assessed and found horrifying, particularly for Alberta. Ottawa stalled, while environmentalists and the left demanded its passage, as did Quebec. However, Ontario industry balked. Realizing that its energy costs would be driven far above those of nations not covered by the treaty or refusing to sign it, Ontario prevailed upon Ottawa to back off. So the treaty remained unsigned. But then came the Chretien-Martin showdown.

The prime minister announced he intended to run for a fourth term, and he obviously meant it. This effectively doomed any Martin hope for succession, and doomed the party to another four years under a man who was already showing serious symptoms of egomania. When a majority of the Liberal caucus sided with Mr. Martin, the prime minister knew he was finished, since the caucus has the power to oust him. So he resigned - effective 18 months hence. Mr. Martin had won, or so he thought. In fact, he had gravely underestimated the prime minister's condition. So outraged was the prime minister by this palace revolt that he began to behave incoherently.
Travelling to Africa, he basks in the adulation of tinhorn Third-World autocrates (some of them accomplished murderers), while simultaneously sniping at the United States. And of course Canada will sign the Kyoto treaty, he declares - and by the year's end, too.

"Arriving home, he triumphantly announces plans for an enormous spending program, and orders the legislation prepared. He decrees that anyone running to succeed him must first resign from his cabinet, a requirement utterly without precedent. In a memorial program for New York's 9/11 victims, he charges that through greed and pride the U.S. had asked for the attack. Later, when a top aide publicly describes the president of the United States as a 'moron,' he refuses to fire her.
Suddenly, the entire Ottawa situation has radically altered. Due to the apparent, shall we say, illness of the prime minister, all bets are off. So are all commitments, including the assurance to Ralph Klein that the Kyoto treaty would never be passed. Now it clearly would be passed. So what would he do?
"In the end he did nothing - nothing effective anyway.

He made the expected gestures: the loud protests; the advertising campaign; the legal case, to be brought before a court which has decided in the federal favour, and against the provinces' in every single one of the last dozen or so cases to come before it. But Ralph was beaten - unless, that is, he was willing to call a provincial election on the issue. Had he done this, Ottawa would have backed off. But Ottawa knew such a move would take far more 'fire in the belly' (to use an authentic Klein expression) than Alberta's premier now possesses.

"How much damage this will do to Alberta, Alberta is about to discover. One thing, however, has become abundantly clear. All three westernmost provinces need a new kind of premier. They need premiers who do not regard Canada as a completed nation, but a work in progress, who see it as a country in dire need of major constitutional change, and who realize the necessary changes can never be won within the existing system. As Quebec has so eloquently demonstrated, effective reform can be won only by a province or provinces genuinely resolved to separate themselves if the changes are not granted.

"Blackmail, you say? No, not blackmail. Simple negotiation. But negotiation by a premier with real clout. Not one like poor powerless Ralph Klein, now laughed at and scorned by his masters in Ottawa." (End of Ted Byfield's article)

FURTHER COMMENT (By Ron Gostick): So we now have a new "foundation" with a first-class magazine, a headquarters in Alberta, but nation-wide in nature and reach, and with the very talented and respected Byfield family deeply involved. This is indeed encouraging.

Good news! A few thoughts on this development include: The "foundation" already has over 3,000 membership.
The name of the 'foundation" is "Citizens Centre for Freedom and Democracy." That's probably appropriate for today's Canada, though, personally, I would sooner have seen the word "Responsibility" or "Accountability" rather than 'Democracy,' inasmuch as this word has been so abused and degraded, especially politically, these past decades that it now can mean anything or nothing. But the aims and objectives of the Foundation listed by Link Byfield are excellent. Right on! Indeed, they deem focussed on a policy of promoting the decentralizing of power back to the citizens of our country where it rightfully belongs.
The calling of a national assembly within about a year, is a wise move: it should allow its members and leaders to meet and get to know each other; it gives the grassroot member an opportunity to participate and have a say on policy, and to bring forward valuable ideas, opinion and experience.
Sound it is, too, that this Foundation, is focussing not on promoting another new political party, but on researching and bringing forward information, ideas, values, etc., throughout our citizenry - to motivate and equip citizens with the information, and knowledge they need to make sound decisions in all aspects of life. I noted in a recent issue of Report magazine that Link Byfield is urging members and supporters of the new Foundation to send in ideas respecting the content and operation of its agenda as soon as possible so that these matters could be considered at the forthcoming assembly. Excellent suggestion!

And speaking of issues! My goodness! 'content and issues' should be right down the alley of our readers and supporters. Almost a decade ago, this Service began developing and promoting what we termed 'The Third Option for national unity,' outlining a better way for our great country than either fragmentation and separatism, or our present so-called 'status-quo federalism.' This turned out to be a motivating force in research and interest in our country's history and future, one of the results of which was the striking of a Canadian Constitutional Committee in Alberta and including some national personnel. And this Committee, after exhaustive study and research, developed and produced a proposed new and updated Canadian Constitution 2000 for our country. This new constitutional proposal was published in the thousands, was distributed by this Service and others, and copies sent to all MPs, Senators, all provincial members of every Canadian provincial legislature, including our Territories, and to every Canadian English-language weekly newspaper, to the major dailies, to the newsrooms of all TV and Radio stations across Canada, and to countless others, columnists, etc.
And that new Constitutional Proposal, like the BNA Act Constitution of 1867, deals with practically all the vital issues and essential reforms of this modern-age Canada, carefully respecting our constitutional heritage: Senate reform, the PM's office reform, Supreme Court appointment reform, accountability reform, etc.

This question is further discussed in the On Target section of this CIS. So, let us hope many of our supporters have joined the new Foundation, are lining up Issues to send in for the Assembly, and are planning to attend and participate in that significant event.

© Published by the Australian League of Rights, P.O. Box 27 Happy Valley, SA 5159