I read that medical information should be shared if it is anonymous. I used to agree with that.  Why would I not agree if everything is above-board, if the information was being shared to improve the health care of people and if things were done morally and ethically.  But then I found out how the medical system really works.

These posts have examples of how, essentially, all our information has been shared non-anonymously:

-Post – Auditor General – PARIS report – 5/24/2010 – Vancouver Coastal Health audit showed that there was virtually no protection of patient information. And there was no reason to believe that any other hospital database was any better.

  • Post – Our Information is not protected – Part I – 12/27/2015 – researchers could, and were, downloading and sharing our information with no detection.  They could give it to anyone else, who could also “share” this information, again without detection.

–  Post – Our Information is not protected – Part II – 12/29/2015 – more examples of how our information is shared non-anonymously

Post – Patenting DNA – 2016-02-04 – if you collect enough information on an individual, even if it is anonymous, you can identify who they are.

And we know, logically, that this is just the tip of the iceberg. The ones the media happen to find out about.  The rest are either not caught or they are covered up.

Now, I would only agree to my information being shared conditionally. The conditions being:

  1. I am told if information is being collected for “others” and not for my direct personal health care
  2. I am told who it is being shared with.
  3. I am told how it will be used.
  4. I have proof that the information collected under my name is being adequately protected.
  5. It can be proven to me that this information will only be shared anonymously.
  6. I can get this in writing.
  7. There will be severe penalties if any of the conditions listed above are “violated”.

This, of course, presumes that I have any say in the collection and sharing of my information, which in our low-grade so-called democracy; I don’t. The medical system and their friends do what they want.  I am, like other patients except the “special” patients,  just fodder for them to feed off.

But any information that I determine they don’t need for my direct health care (and that is very little) I mix up between truth/lies. The information then becomes useless.

These people in the medical/government business just steal, lie and con. Why? They eventually lose all trust and it just comes back on them.  What are they getting in return for taking such risks?  Or did they really think they could do this forever with impunity?  Are they that arrogant/narcissistic?  Apparently, they are.


Number of Breaches Unknown

“The total number of intentional health-related privacy breaches in Ontario is unknown because of legislation allowing hospitals to handle such violations internally and report them at their own discretion. The commission is notified of about 400 health-related privacy breaches every year and a Star investigation of eight Toronto health institutions unveiled 218 privacy violations last year, the majority of which went unreported to the commission”. (c)  So, the majority of privacy “breaches” you won’t hear about because they are being unreported (covered up), or, as in BC, legalized; and I believe it is the same in all provinces.

Mandatory Reporting of Breaches (or Not)

“Michael Crystal, a lawyer currently representing thousands of patients” said it should be ‘mandatory for hospitals to report all privacy leaks.” (a)  “69.5 percent of Canadian respondents stated that there should be a public listing hosted by the Canadian government that lists which hospitals have had breaches of patient health records”. (c)  I suggest this should include “minor” breaches that are not reported to the privacy commissioner and the so-called “major” ones that are reported to the privacy commissioner.  Otherwise, we will be hearing a lot of “we didn’t think this was serious” excuses.  We should be informed as to what defines minor vs major breaches.

“If hospitals were obligated under law to report privacy violations, the (privacy) commission would be able to identify trends, investigate specific areas of concern and help hospitals prevent future incidents, Beamish said” (Ontario privacy commissioner Brian Beamish). (a) This will also help reduce the number of cases that the medical/government organizations can cover-up without being caught.  This must also include any breaches by people/organizations with whom our information is shared.

We, the people, need this transparency to ensure accountability.

For the status on your province on mandatory reporting see Ontario lags other provinces in updating health privacy laws, Olivia Carville, 06 Feb 2015, Toronto Star

Identify with whom our information is shared

The medical/government business in Ontario is discussing making changes so it looks like, to use a metaphor, they are trying to lock the front door (hospital violations), so people don’t notice that the backdoor is being left wide open (the researchers, suppliers, and other organizations, etc. with whom our information is being shared). We need to know exactly with whom our information is being shared, under what circumstances, whether our consent has been obtained (real not manufactured), what are the conditions that these “others” must meet to protect our information and are these conditions being met.


We need on-going audits of all people/organizations that handle our information to ensure that our privacy is protected. The audits must be done by people not appointed by the medical/government system.   ‘In the US, the government has taken several steps to encourage health care providers to improve the security of their information technology systems. In addition to requiring public disclosure of breaches — an incentive in the form of the proverbial “wall of shame” — the US government will be dropping in on some health care providers” to “check compliance with privacy requirements”.   “Under their privacy act, health organizations are required to have conducted a risk analysis and implemented policies to protect patient privacy. The maximum annual penalty for violating the act is US$1.5 million.” (e)

Suing for Privacy Breach

“The Ontario Court of Appeal ruled earlier this year that patients can sue hospitals if their privacy was breached.” (d)  This should be the law in all provinces and include any people/organizations who have our information.


“Beamish told the Star he wanted serious breaches to result in more prosecutions to deter nosy health professionals” and the other people/organizations with our information. (a) But we also need to hold accountable those who are suppose to protect our privacy – the politicians, healthcare executives…   We need to know why they aren’t doing their job.  And we need to be able to prosecute them.

In some provinces the health ministry may refer a serious breach to the privacy commissioner who investigates. If the privacy commissioner believes there are grounds for prosecution they refer it to the attorney general, who may refer it to the police to reinvestigate.

So much wasted time and effort because somewhere along the line the case gets dropped.

“Privacy commissioner Brian Beamish has previously told the Star that confusion over the roles of the attorney general, the Health Ministry and the privacy office have also hamstrung potential prosecutions.” (b) All these years and nothing has been done to fix the situation.  No wonder there has been zero prosecutions in Ontario, where thousands of privacy violations happen every year.  But, I’m sure the politicians have been far too busy going to photo-ops, or lining their pockets, to make adjustments.  Or is it just “convenient” to have it this way.

“Ontario is not alone. British Columbia, New Brunswick, Saskatchewan, Prince Edward Island and Yukon have not seen any prosecutions under health privacy laws.” (b)

“Alberta has had three successful prosecutions, Manitoba has had one and Newfoundland and Labrador has had two.” (b) Considering the extent of the problem, this is a farcical record in any province.

Covering up the extent of breaches, or sharing of information, so patients will trust the medical business is not an answer. Eventually patients find out and trust is lost, possibly forever.  Withholding information is just another form of lying to patients.

After all the lying, the cover-ups, the conning, “trust us” just doesn’t work any more.
(a) Hundreds of hospital privacy violations go unreported – Olivia Carville, 13 Jan 2015,    The Star

(b) Ontario government under fire over inaction on health privacy law – Olivia Carville, 05 Mar 2015, Toronto Star

(c) Canada:  How Privacy Considerations Drive Patient Decisions and Impact Patient Care Outcomes – December 2011, New London Consulting

(d) Fines to double for breach of Ontario patients’ medical records – Keith Leslie, 10 June  2015, CTV News

(e) Medical privacy breaches rising – Roger Collier, 06 Mar, 2012. vol. 184 no.4, Canadian Medical Association Journal (CMAJ)


  1. THOUSANDS OF B.C. PRIVATE HEALTH RECORDS SOLD AT PUBLIC AUCTION. (a) Mike de Jong was involved in this one too. He was labour minister whose ministry oversaw the auction process.  Again, extremely private information was sold for $300 such as “medical status – including whether they have a mental illness, HIV or a substance-abuse problem”, social insurance numbers, date of births, names, phone numbers, and “caseworker entries divulging extremely intimate details of people’s lives”, and more.

Mary Carlson, director of the Office of the Information and Privacy Commissioner of B.C. said “the government had sold sensitive information to the public once before, but that the details of the case had not been made public. She added that she is ‘disappointed’ to hear it has happened again”. (a)

  1. The Human Resources and Skills Development Canada (HRSDC) “lost the personal information of half-a-million Canadians last year.” They lost an unencrypted external hard drive containing Canada Student Loan information and a USB key containing information such as social insurance numbers, medical records, birth dates, education levels, occupations, etc.” (b)
  2. Ontario has had so many breaches that they held a press conference to apologize. They told people that most workers in the health system are honest people. That may be true in terms of downloading large amounts of information (lying/stealing/conning information from patients is another issue) but you don’t protect medical information from those who won’t steal it, you protect it from those who will steal it.  So, the government/medical system is responsible for not protecting the information.  Just like a bank doesn’t install a security system to protect its assets from the 90% who won’t steal but from the 10% that will steal.  A bank might get its money back but with medical information, once it’s out there, it’s out there, you don’t get it back.  Examples:                                                                                      i. An anti-abortion activist has been accused of prying “into hundreds of abortion records”. DeCiccio worked at a hospital and “the hospital placed no restrictions on what records she could or could not access”. (c)

“Since being informed of this case in May 2011, Beamish (acting privacy commissioner) said he has noticed a concerning trend where increasing numbers of hospital staff are accessing patient records without authorization, including the recent breach of former mayor Rob Ford’s medical files”. (c)

ii. “Hospital workers in Toronto have been disciplined, and some fired, for taking photos of patients without their consent, losing scores of health records or inappropriately prying into a patient’s file when they are not involved in their care.” (d)

“Earlier this year, the Star unveiled two major hospital privacy breach cases involving thousands of patients. In one case, hospitals inappropriately provided patient information to baby photographers. In another, hospitals were handing out patient contact information to private marketing companies.” (d)

iii. Six greater Toronto area hospitals apparently sold patient information to photographer(s).   And yet, Mount Sinai, one of the six, said “Since we learned of this breach (italics mine), we have changed our practice..”.  This implies they didn’t know what they were doing; they had a contract to sell this information but they didn’t know they were doing it; how does that happen? (e)

iv. Other examples you may want to read about: Rouge Valley hospital privacy breach expands to affect 14,450 patients, Joel Eastwood, 27 Aug 2014, Toronto Star; Hundreds of hospital privacy violations go unreported, Olivia Carville, 13 Jan 2015, Toronto Star; Ontario lags other provinces in updating health privacy laws, Olivia Carville, 06 Feb 2015, Toronto Star. A few of the examples you will read about in this articles: “pharmacist opening medical records of fellow congregants”; “a doctor who snooped into 141 women’s medical records, including gynecology reports” (h); “while standing in line for a pizza…doctor chatted on his cellphone about the private details of a patient” (I)

v. Another informative article: Peterborough lawsuit to set precedent for Ontario patient privacy rights, Joel Eastwood, 03 Sep 2014, Toronto Star. Update:  This lawsuit was dismissed because the prosecutors bungled the case (Ontario’s sole health privacy prosecution quietly dismissed,  Olivia Carville, 30 Mar 2015, Toronto Star).  How convenient.  But two more cases are on the go.
The worst that happens to the few privacy violators actually caught is they are fired. “Beamish (acting privacy commissioner in Ontario) is aware of only two provinces, Alberta and Newfoundland and Labrador, which have successfully prosecuted under health-related privacy acts”. (c)  This indicates that the privacy acts are useless, a facade.  Quite frankly, I don’t think just being fired is much of a deterrent for severe cases of privacy violation (for example, when information is shared).  What happens to these fired people?; do they get rehired after a period of time (see post “BC Nurses”, Nov. 4, 2008), do they go to work in a nursing home or other facility (Ontario’s sole health privacy prosecution quietly dismissed,  Olivia Carville, 30 Mar 2015, Toronto Star)?; are they required to pay back any benefits from the privacy violation?

I think the ability to sue the hospitals is important in order to get them to take this issue seriously. Despite the fact that the medical system always say “we take the protection of people’s privacy very seriously”, obviously they don’t.  But, I believe, the prospect of being sued may encourage hospitals to coverup even more violations.  What is also required is some kind of oversight/ongoing audits conducted by citizens groups (or something similar), not chosen by, and outside the influence of, the political/medical organizations.

When I was in front of St. Paul’s, a couple years before the press conference, one person said he worked in a pharmacy in Ontario and that Ontario had tightened up its privacy and people in the pharmacy now had to get permission to access previously available information.  Apparently, it is VERY INCONVENIENT.  Isn’t that sad.  Protecting people’s privacy is INCONVENIENT for people in the medical business.  Accessing patient’s information SHOULD be difficult and if that’s inconvenient to researchers, etc. then find another line of work.  Yet, these recent scandals indicate that they are still doing a very poor job at privacy protection.

I commend the Toronto Star for its investigations and reports. If only other media, in other provinces, would do the same, it would prevent a lot of patient suffering in the future.

  1. “Personal health information belonging to 620,000 Albertans and stored unencrypted on a private company’s laptop was stolen” in Sept. 2013. “The data on the laptop included patients’ names, dates of birth, provincial health card numbers, billing codes, billing amounts and diagnostic codes.

Medicentres Family Health Care Clinics chief medical officer Dr. Arif Bhimji said “Medicentres “immediately” contacted the Edmonton Police Service and Office of the Information Privacy Commissioner”. Apparently, immediately was four days later.  But no one informed the Alberta Health (who eventually received a letter) or the patients (informed by the media) until January 2014.

The politicians were, of course, “outraged”. But isn’t it their job to ensure that our privacy is protected, even when they outsource?  But I guess it sounds good in the press.

Alberta Medical Association president Dr. Allan Garbutt said physicians are trained from early on to keep all medical information highly protected based on the principle that it belongs to the patient and no one else”(italics mine) .  He admitted that there are numerous ways medical information can be misused .  The  British Columbia medical business seems to operate on the principle that patient information belongs to everyone but the patient.  Does Alberta medical staff give anything but “lip service” to this principle?

As one patient said: ‘I don’t want my diagnosis given to just anyone. It’s up to me to disclose what is happening to me’.  In my opinion, this also applies to researchers.  As we know from researchers health scandal (prior post – Our Information Is Not Protected) the medical business and anonymous are total opposites.  Apparently the Medicentres laptop has never been recovered.

There have been more than “four other similar incidents that affected hundreds of thousands of people in the last decade” (that we know of). (g)  Most involved the theft/loss of laptops.

  1. “For a precedence on how bad privacy breaches in Canada can be, one need look no further than the case of Captain Sean Bruyea, a Canadian Air Force officer who served in the Persian Gulf War in 1991. Without his permission or knowledge, all of his personal, medical and financial files were distributed across a wide swath of officials in the Department of Veterans Affairs, who used this as ammunition to try to silence what was a fierce critic for Canada’s returning veterans. A total of 54 people had inappropriately accessed Bruyea’s file; 36 received an ‘administrative memo;’ nine were reprimanded and nine received one-day suspensions. Nobody was fired. No one. Let’s put this in context: When government employees were actually found to be egregiously breaking the law in accessing personalized files, not a single person was fired.”  Scandal taints BC Ministry of Health’s Pharmaceutical Services Division, Alan Cassels, April 2013, Common Ground
  2. I suggest you read Your Information Is Not Secure, Michael Geist, 01 May 2013, This report reveals that “virtually every major [federal] government department has sustained [privacy] breaches and gives examples. It also states that the Privacy Commissioner of Canada is rarely notified of the breaches.
  3. A binder was stolen from a doctor’s car containing information on B.C. Transplant patients.  It included patient names and other information.  Patient Information Stolen,16 Dec 2011, 24 Hours
  4.  Other examples of the medical business’ hypocrisy regarding patient privacy:                                                                              i. When I had to go through the medical system (see future post “My Story”) I would stand at reception at the doctor’s office or office of other medical people and be asked to provide personal information while there were people directly behind and beside me, who could easily overhear everything being said. In some cases, I tried writing the information on a piece of paper or answering very softly and they would repeat what I said so loudly the whole waiting room, or most, could hear. At Burnaby General Hospital, in emergency, they have the reception desk right in front of the waiting room where everyone, or most, could overhear the conversation regarding the collection of personal information.                                                                                   ii. I was in a doctor’s very small reception/waiting room. The staff would talk to patients on the phone, sometimes even stating the patient’s name. People in the waiting room couldn’t help by overhear the conversation.                                             iii. I was in a pharmacy where they had a sign which said “stand back to respect people’s privacy”.  The pharmacy wasn’t that large so you would have to stand half way, or more, across the room, to avoid hearing the conversation.  The counter was also near the door so there was traffic coming & going.

But, hey, just ask them and they will tell you “your information is protected”. They don’t care about people’s privacy..  It’s inconvenient, to them.





  1. THOUSANDS OF B.C. PRIVATE HEALTH RECORDS SOLD AT PUBLIC AUCTION –  Jonathan Fowlie, 04 Mar 2006, Vancouver Sun (a paper I didn’t buy)
  2. Human Resources bureaucrats questioned over data breach – Jessica Murphy, 15 Feb 2013, 24 Hours
  3. Anti-abortion activist snooped into 414 abortion files – Olivia Carville, 21 Jan 2015, Toronto Star
  4. Hospital privacy violations rife in Ontario – Olivia Carville, 29 Oct 2014, Toronto Star
  5. Privacy breach: Six GTA hospitals gave patient info to photographers – Joel Eastwood, 29 Aug 2014, Toronto Star
  6. Laptop with 620,000 Albertans’ personal health information stolen – Robson Fletcher, 22 Jan 2014, Metro News
  7. 4 other cases of stolen health data in Alberta – 22 Jan 2014, CBC News
  8. Ontario lags other provinces in updating health privacy laws – Olivia Carville, 06 Feb 2015,  Toronto Star.
  9. Hundreds of hospital privacy violations go unreported – Olivia Carville, 13 Jan 2015, Toronto Star



I have heard people ask what they can do. Politicians (past, present, future, wannabes) need to know that when they lie, steal, con, destroy our democracy, freedoms, and rights, there are consequences.  So, here are some suggestions:

Smaller Things:

– If I unexpectedly encounter a politician, or any member of their family, I turn my back on  them and walk away.

– I try to avoid any event where the turdits will be. Or if I feel a need to attend, then, when the turdit speaks, again I turn my back and walk away until they are finished with their self-serving, campaigning, talking points.

– I will not serve on any board or committee that has a politician or a member of their family.

– I try to avoid purchases from company’s owned by politicians and their family members. For example, I never ate at an A & W because I knew at least two were owned by a politician, but I didn’t know which two.

– I try to avoid purchases from large corporations that hire politicians or their family members. If I think I need something from one of these stores then I first consider if there is an alternative method (ex DIY product), can I do without or buy second hand, etc.    And, for example, I did not listen to a certain radio station that hired turdits.

–  And I do not join organizations (usually non-profits) run by politicians. They use others (the slaves) to do all the work while the politician gets the attention.  They don’t care if their organization accomplishes anything because it’s primary purpose is to get the politician attention.

– I won’t take a course, etc. taught by a politician

– And I don’t buy their books, although I may read it in the library to see if it is a white-wash.  I don’t fall for that “Oh, now that I am out of politics, I see the error of my ways and besides I want to make more money off the suckers called citizens”.

– You could start a website that lists where the politicians get their next job, directorships or other remunerations/gifts, and companies they own.   When a politician has been hired by a company it says a lot about the ethics and integrity of the company so I don’t purchase their products or I minimize what I do buy.  Plus the job may have been paid for by the people, if the politician gave the corporation “special consideration”.

– You could have a protest at election time to let politicians know you are not voting for them because they don’t deserve your vote so politicians can’t use the line that the people are just apathetic. Or start the “Do Not Vote” party for all those who are offended by the political options and peopIe can sign their name, on election day, at the party’s site

– You could start a website the allows people to input their ideas on what we can do.

– You could start a website that tracks what politicians DO, not what they say (thanks Lynn)

Bigger Things (or Overall Change):

The system is broken. We need, as a group, to fix it.   Eventually intelligence or disaster (and I expect it will be the latter) will force people to make a change.  We need to be prepared to provide an alternative system or nothing will really change, except the faces.

So I suggest that someone(s) set up a website (people with more advanced tech skills than mine) to allow people to input their ideas for a new governing system; a system that gives the people control. Someone(s) with no agenda but to find a real democratic system.  We will need to know who runs the website so we can be sure that it isn’t one of the politicians, their friends or their shills.

We can create a framework and start to fill in the parts. I think of it like a puzzle, but with parts (or pieces) that may be interchangeable, that may be modified, or removed as circumstances change and as we (hopefully) evolve.

We can start groups to discuss new ideas or ideas listed on the website, research and submit ideas, and how they can be implemented, or we can do this individually; You can network with other groups/individuals to “brainstorm’ new ideas. You can also recommend books, websites, etc. for others to review, how-to’s, information, definitions, maybe like-minded people getting together to do something specific, etc.  In essence, identify what we want, what routes are available to get there, and what can we do now.

I’ve heard that the Yukon, Nunavat, and the Zapatistas have interesting systems. Some elements may be worth considering.

I have heard that there were democratic societies but they were destroyed by the 1%. If this is true then we may not have to reinvent the wheel.  But we will need to know about these societies.

We need to have a say in what is happening to us and our country all the time, not just some phony vote every four or so years. Some people suggest direct democracy – voting issue by issue; others claim this would be time-consuming.  But would it be time-consuming if something actually got done?  It seems, right now, we just keep going over the same issues, nothing gets solved, nothing gets accomplished;  the children are not being cared for, the homeless are homeless, our industries are disappearing, jobs are disappearing, the environment is not being cared for.  Maybe we just need a REAL plan, an ability to hire the most qualified people in Canada and then the issues would be fewer.

Also, I wonder if there is a way of organizing society in a horizontal, sharing method vs the vertical, hierarchical, power structure that we now have; a web-like organization, with people operating in different “nodes” to reinforce the interconnectedness and reduce/eliminate power struggles. I have seen concepts of this but not in terms of overall society.  Perhaps this could be discussed if a website is setup or, if it has already been discussed, that could appear on the website for discussion with other ideas.

A suggested way to start:

Stage/Step 1 – Knowing that what we have doesn’t work

Stage/Step 2 – Ask questions – what do we want, what don’t we want

Stage/Step 3 – Research other systems, including small groups of people that may have a workable form of democracy.

Stage/Step 4 – We need some standard information but also some “out of the box” thinking. Read/study on creative thinking, how to think outside the box, brainstorming (or just do it) and then use that to generate new ideas. When brainstoming, any idea is a good idea no matter how strange it may seem.  It’s to be decided later if all, or a part of the idea, fits into where we want to go or maybe the idea will be useful at a later time.

Stage/Step 5 – Create a framework of a system or more than one and later decide which is preferred. A system that allows for changes. Our current system is too rigid and serves the wrong people.

Stage/Step 6 – Work on details, see the effect one thing has on other things that have been determined to be important to people’s lives, work on compromises for contentious elements. Determine if step 5 meets our (all life forms/the planet) needs.   Each step will likely require going back and revising one or more parts in prior steps and moving forward again and you keep doing this until things fit.

Stage/Step 7 – Implement. This will likely have to be done in a mixture of small and large steps working around politicians and their friends.  These people will do everything they can to disrupt and destroy this process because it does not serve them.  What will they do without the slaves?  What will they do if they can’t think themselves “better” than other people?

Stage/Step 8 – Adjust what doesn’t work or start again. At least this time we will have a clearer idea why something does or does not work.  And it does need to be a system where NO ONE, NO GROUP can be in control because these people will corrupt the system until it only serves them.  And this must be a system that can evolve.

And, of course, when the website is setup you have to let people know it’s there.

I believe that this has to be a Canadian effort for Canada. This does not mean that foreigners cannot input ideas.  But they have to be identified as foreigners.  We need to know what is wanted by Canadians for Canada.  Others can use it as a template to change their system if they choose.

If we know where we want to go, we can figure out how to get there and the trade-offs and we can keep doing this with every issue. Right now we have no idea what is happening because of the lies and the culture of secrecy.

If we create a vision forward, a plan, maybe Canadians will build/create it, one step at a time; a plan which includes all Canadians, which gives them a voice, a REAL role in their own governance.  At the very least we will have an backup plan WE WANT, “when we decide we need it”.

It can be done but it requires work and time.   There are groups/websites, etc. with ideas on how to save the environment, on the economy, on so many things.  But nothing can change with our current system because the politicians and their friends won’t allow it.  Now we need grassroots to design a new system.  When change happens will we be ready for it or will we, in desperation, take whatever is offered to us or forced on us?

There is a cost to doing nothing. So, the real question is – Is saving the life forms, the planet, having a real democracy, ending our enslavement, poverty, and so on, worth it to you???

“You never change things by fighting the existing reality!
To change something, build a new model that makes the existing model obsolete!”
— Buckminster Fuller

If anyone creates any of these websites please let me know. You can reach me at the comment section of my blog or my email:



I’m adding this because I think I think it exemplifies the obstructionism we face. And, to inform people who haven’t encountered them, or didn’t realize that was what they were/are doing.  And to let others, who have dealt with these people, know that they are not alone.  These examples also illustrate that obstructionism is part of the culture in the government, including the medical system.

  1. Privacy Commissioners Office: After moving, I looked into opening an account at the Bank of Nova Scotia. I ended up writing to the Privacy Commissioner regarding, what I considered to be, excessive information requirements.  For example, the bank wanted the names of all my family members (wouldn’t that be a violation of their privacy?).  The question was whether this bank was allowed to “demand” (i.e. no choice) this information in order for someone to open a basic bank account,   The Privacy Commissioner told me that I had to contact a number of others first.  I had already contacted the president of the bank and received a non-answer.  It didn’t fall under the mandate of the bank ombudsman. The Financial Consumer Agency of Canada said they would look into it but I would not be informed of the result.  Then what is the point of looking into it and why can’t I be informed?  As far as I know the staff at the Financial Consumer Agency just went back to sitting on their butts, doing nothing but sticking their hands in our pockets.

So back to the privacy commissioner. First I received a response from Nicole Menard telling me that the bank had the right to ask the questions.  Her decision was based on the Canadian Bankers Association website “Opening a Bank Account.”  I read it and it said that you were only required to provide two pieces of identification.  I pointed this out to her and asked to have someone else review the file.

So, next I get a letter from Christina Derenzis who tells me that she has reviewed my file and that I have to contact the Ombudsman. I told her that if she had read my file she would know that I had already done so.

Next, I am contacted by Kyle Larsen. He wants to start the process at square one and ask the Bank of Nova Scotia the same questions I had already asked and would I like them to contact me directly.  No, I said; been there, done that.  I wanted to know if they had the right to demand this information.  I sent this letter in August.  I sent a follow-up letter in October pointing out that I had not received a reply.  I sent an email in November, again pointing out that I had not heard from him and threatened to go to my MP (it appears there is a use for an MP).  He responded and is now working on my case (so he says).

Even if the privacy commissioner agrees with me, NOTHING will happen. But this is the set-up.  They run you in circles and do NOTHING.  The only reason I filed the complaint with the privacy commissioner’s office because, if the the Bank of Nova Scotia has violated my rights as I suspect, then I want it on record.  If the privacy commissioner’s office decides the Bank of Nova Scotia has not violated my rights, I want that on record as well.

An Aside: I opened an account with a different bank and the bank manager said they didn’t share my information.  I said except with their associates, suppliers and so on (and whoever they share our information with).  And she said “but we don’t share it with, ummm”, she thought for a moment, “with 7-11”.  That did make me feel so much better (sarcasm alert).

About ten years ago I filed a similar complaint with the privacy commissioner, but regarding the Royal Bank. The privacy commissioner did an investigation and found the bank had violated the Privacy Act, the Bank Act and I think another act. As far as I know, nothing changed with the bank but at least the privacy commissioner did an investigation and I knew that what was being done was illegal.  Then again, maybe something did change.  Maybe the government decided they needed to protect their friends and implemented an obstructionist policy regarding any inquiries.

  1. Then there are the federal integrity commissioners. Christiane Quimet, first, and Mario Dion (1, 4, 5), second integrity commissioner in a row accused of incompetence and mismanagement. This office, created by the Conservative government, “is supposed to protect public servants who blow the whistle on wrongdoing within the federal government”. (1)  “He (David Hutton) said Ouimet and Dion are both lifelong bureaucrats who come from a culture where protecting those above you is a career-enhancing prerequisite. (1)

“Now you’re putting these people in a position where their job is to expose wrongdoing which will embarrass their deputy minister and departments, if it’s done properly,” said Hutton.” (1) So, Wouldn’t it be better to have a citizen committee(s), not appointed by the politicians or their lackeys, select the commissioners.

Sheila Fraser, auditor general, audited Ouiment and “also found Ouimet was bullying her staff, sometimes yelling and swearing at them in public”. (2)

“During her three years on the job, Ouimet investigated only five of the more than 200 complaints her office received, and never produced any recommendations or findings of wrongdoing committed against whistleblowers. (2)

In addition to three years of wages and benefits for doing apparently virtually nothing, Christiane Ouiment was paid $500,000 of our money when she was forced to resign in disgrace (isn’t this called fired). Do you get paid to quit a job/fired, especially because you failed to do your job?

“But since Ouimet was an officer of Parliament and not beholden to the government, opposition MPs are now wondering why the prime minister was the one to buy her out.”

“’Why does the prime minister get to decide?’ asked Liberal MP Navdeep Baines, adding Ouimet’s closeness with the government, “puts into question her independence as well.

‘Why was the prime minister’s office and his department (the privy council) interfering with her independence, and why did she receive half a million dollars to walk away?’” (3)

I am pleased to hear that over 200 people, in about three years, in the federal government are courageous enough to become whistleblowers. It is always disappointing, of course, that it’s necessary and that nothing is being done about it because the politicians have created fake organizations.

Remember we pay for all these sham organizations who treat us with contempt.




  1. Auditor general: ‘Gross mismanagement’ in files handled by integrity commissioner, Bruce Cheadle, 15 Apr 2014, Toronto Star.
  2. Former integrity commissioner ignores summons, again, 08 Feb 2011, Toronto Sun
  3. Ouimet calls AG’s ‘special’ audit a personal attack, Bryn Weese, 10 Mar 2011, Toronto Star
  4. Canada’s integrity commissioner should be fired,Guiseppe Valiante, 15 Apr 2014, Toronto Sun
  5. Integrity Commissioner Dion should be replaced, Allan Cutler, 14 Apr 2014, Canadians for Accountability


(Also see prior post “Not Voting” April 11, 2013 for Part I)

I include in the definition of a politician those who are past, present, future and wannabe politicians. A politician is not what you do, it is who you are as a human being – liar, thief, con, destroyer of democracy and freedom, parasite, and so on.

Not voting does not mean doing nothing. See future post “ What Can You Do – Politicians”;  Some may choose to vote while still working on changing the system.  I even made an exception to not voting in the last federal election because I wanted Bill C-51 revoked and a proportional representation system.  But this is probably wishful thinking based on lies by the turdits. (In reforming electoral system, parties favour what benefits them most, Campbell Clark, 29 Jul 2015, The Globe and Mail).

I checked the box “Do Not Add to Register of Electors” so my information would not be shared with political parties and all my information is deleted after the election. But this is another government farce because inside scrutineers can add to their list any names they don’t already have and share with outside scrutineers.  They can use it for the next election or sell it or whatever they do with this information (see prior post “BC Bill 20).

I will also be sending a letter to the province and municipality to have my name kept off the voters list. If I choose to make an exception and vote, I can always register.  But first I have to find out what “triggers” get my name on the voters list, for example does making any change on your driver’s licence act as a trigger.

It’s sad that when you do vote you have to hold your nose and vote for the party you hope will do the least amount of damage; you can’t vote for a party you think will do their best for the people and country of Canada because there are none.

Justin Trudeau got a majority of the seats, largely I believe due to strategic voting and a desire to get rid of Harper. One always hopes for the best but, in reality, a politician is a politician.

How do you get a politician? You walk behind satan and scoop up what drops out of his lower cavity.  Crude but true.  So I refer to these “people” as turdits (I may have borrowed this, if so thank you) and a few other words. I reserve my opinion of independents.

The turdits are why things don’t get better, and in many areas, are getting worse. Can you imagine how different it would be if we had people working for the citizenry.

I don’t vote because: (Note: this is for those people who don’t keep up with the misconduct of, and abuse of trust by, the politicians and this is just a partial list):

  1. We don’t have a democracy, only a pseudo-democracy, a fake, an illusion or barely-there, non-functioning, democracy; some people call it a constitutional dictatorship. We are allowed, even encouraged to vote but “If voting changed anything, they’d make it illegal” (Emma Goldman) (We have the form of a parliamentary democracy, but not the substance – Andrew Coyne, 27 May 2015, National Post).
  2. Politicians lie, steal, con, destroy our democracy, freedoms and rights. One of my other words for them is sewer trash, which is a reflection of the level of my disgust/contempt.
  3. Who do you vote for? turdit 1, turdit 2, turdit 3.. They are all the same. You get really disgusted with turdit 1 in “power” and you vote for turdit 2.  Then you get really disgusted with turdit 2 and you go back to voting for turdit 1. So, what has changed?  NOTHING.  It’s just a merry-go-round.  Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results (Albert Einstein)
  4. Slavery comes in different forms but it is still slavery. This is a government run by and for the politicians and their friends, not for us We just pay their expenses and line their pockets.  Politicians are part of the problem, not the solution.
  5. To quote commenter Mooney7 “After all they claim to rule with the consent of the governed”. When I don’t vote I take away my consent for them to govern. I don’t enable them.

The following examples are, federally, largely conservative examples because they are the most recent and the Conservatives were “in power” for 10 years.   I’m sure there is a list for the Liberals somewhere, the sponsorship scandal being one of the most notorious.  We will see how many democracy destroying, and corrupt, acts Trudeau and his minions commit, or if he eliminates the abuses and corruption.  Examples:

  1. Politicians take away our rights and sell/trade/barter us. Isn’t that what you do to slaves? Examples BC Bill 11 (which gives the Minister of Health power to collect, gather, use and share personal information without any notice to or consent from affected individuals..), BC Bill 35 – 2012 – The Pharmaceutical Services Act (see post dated 25 Sept 2012), federal Bill C-51 (the bill is a massive invasion of the privacy of innocent people), (The state gets more intrusive, again, Lawrence Martin, 17 Feb 2015, The Globe and Mail); (Privacy Commissioner Slams Bill C-51, 09 Mar 2015,; Canada’s New Privacy Rights Battles, Sean Condon, 17 Jul 2013, Megaphone Magazine); Bill C-13 – the lawful access and cyberbullying bill, Bill S-4 – The Digital Privacy Act and so on (With Elections Act, Canada Slides into Ventriloquism Democracy, Michael Harris, 21 Mar 2014, iPolitics); (The Canadian Government Has Given Up on Protecting Your Privacy, Michael Geist, 03 Jun 2014,
  2. Power of the PMO (Prime Minister’s Office); and I believe this would apply to the Premiers office:

“the greatest threat to responsible government in Canada is none other than the Prime Minister’s Office.

The PMO uses its toxic tentacles to neutralize every part of government that might compete with it for power, so that today we are ruled by an imperial prime minister, unaccountable to anyone or anything.

Today the PMO is virtually a government unto itself.

The PMO enforces its will two ways: through the prime minister’s power to appoint and fire cabinet ministers, committee members and deputy ministers; and his or her power to approve the nomination of everyone who runs for the party. “ (a)

“It has morphed into a 90-person juggernaut of political strategists, ‘issues managers’ and party enforcers who exercise strict control over cabinet, the houses of Parliament and the bureaucracy.“(b)

“The PMO gains strength by weakening the institutions around it.” (b)

The Prime Minister also makes appointments ranging “from heads of agencies and CEOs of crown corporations to members of quasi-judicial tribunals” (Government in Council Appointments Overview, Government of Canada). In other words, “all national positions of consequence are appointed or approved personally by the prime minister” (Canada Needs Proportional Representation Now, Rafe Mair, 05 Jan 2015, The PM selects judges usually from “recommendations made by the 17 Judicial Advisory Committees across Canada” (Ottawa picks gay marriage critic to sit on Ontario’s highest court, Sean Fine, 24 Jun 2015, The Globe and Mail).  These recommendations are shortlisted by parliamentarians and then the shortlisted are vetted in parliamentary hearings but at least part of this process is being eliminated and the judges are simply selected by the PMO (Unvetted Quebec judge takes Supreme Court seat, 06 Oct 2015, The Globe and Mail). Controlling the institutions is how the PM controls the society and the people in the institutions are loyal to him.

The politicians complain about the senators and their scandals. But many, or all, senators were appointed by the prime minister of the day as a reward for past and/or future “services” to the political parties and not for what they can do for the people.  For example, I read that Mike Duffy was appointed because he was a great fundraiser and speaker for the conservative party.

We could take back some of the power of the PMO by having citizen’s committees, or something similar (not selected by politicians), make these appointments. Then we also wouldn’t have the massive payouts to the political appointees when a new party gets in “power” and appoints all THEIR crony’s or when they lose their position due to incompetency, resignation, “reshuffling or firing without cause.  Example: Taxpayers dinged $1.25 million for Post-Election Pay, Bob Mackin, 24 Aug 2013,

We need a system where we, the people, can hire the best, from across Canada, based on qualifications, not selected by some backroom turdits. Employees who can be fired, with two weeks notice, if they are not doing their job; who work for us, not to those who contribute to the turdits coffers & pockets.   A system where we can make long term plans, not plans until the next election, employees who have to tell us what they are doing and who are accountable and transparent or immediately get fired.  So we will no longer be ruled, so WE will be “in power”.  There are lots of citizens who can draw up job descriptions and/or assess applications who are not turdits.  But this will not happen while the turdits are “in power”.

See also 4 (1) Cronyism

  1. Ottawa’s accountability problems start at the top, in the PMO, editorial, 20 Aug 2015, The Globe and Mail
  2. The problem with the PMO (2), editorial, 25 Aug 2015, The Globe and Mail

You may also be interested in reading Canada’s Slide into Sleaze with Stephen Harper (or, the problem with running government like a business), Murray Dobbin, 13 Jan 2014,; will Trudeau operate the same?; Our Democracy on trial, Donald Savoie, 14 Aug 2015, The Globe and Mail; Duffy trial cuts to the heart of the PMO, Lawrence Martin, 18 Aug 2015, The Globe and Mail

3.  What do they do?  (Also, see prior post “DEMOCRACY — OR NOT April 25, 2013) BC MLA’s are paid (I won’t say earned) a lot of money and it’s increasing (Peter McMartin:  The cost — and worth — of our politicians, Peter McMartin, 05 Jul 2013, Vancouver Sun – a paper I didn’t buy).  So what do they do in this “job”?  If you have seen “Whipped” a documentary by Sean Holman (it’s online) then you know that:

a. The MLA’s/MP’s/MN’s don’t represent us. They are suppose to represent the interests of the constituency that elected them but, instead, they represent the party. The decisions are made by the PM/Premier and a few people in the inner circle (some may not have been elected) and they are not interested in the opinions of the MLA’s/MP’s/MN’s.

b. They are told how to vote on any bills by the party whip.

c.  They are told what to say to the citizens (scripted answers/talking points).

“Members of Parliament on the government benches are as useless as tits on a bull. They perform no function other than to vote the way they are told by the Party Whip. Opposition members, while having more freedom to speak, only oppose that which their leader tells them to.” (Canada Needs Proportional Representation Now, Rafe Mair, 05 Jan 2015,

Political candidates are selected based primarily on how much money they can raise and name recognition, NOT qualifications to run a government.

So, a brain or knowledge on any topic is not a requirement. Some “people” say they are politicians because they want to make a difference (for the citizens benefit).  But they can’t make a difference in government because either they toe the line or they get out.

d.  When people write to them with questions, or for help, they either do nothing, pass the request to some government bureaucrat or the request may be answered by the politicians staff (whose wages we pay). So again the politicians do NOTHING.

In the last BC provincial election they didn’t even have an all-candidates meeting in my riding so we could ask what they had to offer but then maybe they were afraid of the questions, they might not have talking points for all of them. Gee, what do I as a politician think on this topic, oh, that’s right I don’t think.

e.  Brent Rathgeber was a conservative MP who quit to become an independent. He wrote a book called “Irresponsible Government: The Decline of Parliamentary Democracy in Canada”.  He states that politicians would work on committees but their work would be discarded unless it supported a decision already made by the inner circle.  In other words, committee work was a make-work project, of no real value since the decision was already made.

“Rathgeber relates how they all have their Commons speeches written for them by the Prime Minister’s office as well as powder puff questions to put to ministers in question period, both of which they are expected to give verbatim — no personal thoughts, now!” (What We Forgot on Remembrance Day, Rafe Mair, 24 Nov 2014,;  Duffy trial sheds light on PMO’s power, hand-holding of parliamentarians –  Jennifer Ditchburn, 25 Aug 2015, The Canadian Press

So, again, what do these people do? They go for photo-ops.  They will go to any event, speak when requested (but only give the scripted answers/talking points), ribbon-cuttings, bar-b-que’s, openings, anything to get their name/picture in the news.  In other words, they are campaigning.  We pay these turdits to campaign for the next election.  But that’s what slaves do, they work a little longer, a little harder or do without for the benefit of the turdits.

Ex. gentleman in trailer park in BC – The power in the trailer park went off and the owner didn’t fix it.  The gentleman couldn’t move to a different trailer park because his trailer was too old.  Pleas were made to the politicians to do something, to make the owner fix the power, but the turdits did nothing.  With winter coming on, the people stepped in, bought him a used but better trailer, acceptable to another trailer park that had power, and the people bought him a few extras.  When it came time to hand over the keys to the trailer, the turdits, who had done nothing, showed up for the photo-op.  Trailer-park nightmare finally over for one resident, Kate Webb, 25-27 Oct 2013, Metro News; UPDATE: BC Hydro responds to 88-year-old left without power for more than two months in Surrey trailer park, Paula Baker, 04 Dec 2013, Global News

f.  And there are the politicians who become ministers, for which they get paid even more. What qualifications (education, experience, knowledge) do these people have to run ministries? Actually, I don’t think they run them, I believe they are just figureheads, who occasionally issue orders as directed by their political masters and create chaos.  And they get moved from ministry to ministry.  Some examples:  Peter Mackay was educated as a lawyer but became Minister of Foreign Affairs and Minister of Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency, the following year he became Minister of National Defence, then Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada (wiki).  So, what education/training did he have that gave him expertise in international affairs, or the military – none;  Mike DeJong (BC) was also trained as a lawyer but was Minister of Finance, Minister of Health, Attorney General, Minister of Aboriginal Relations and Reconciliation, Minister of Labour and Citizens’ Services, and Minister of Forests. (Ministers of BC, Government of BC, June 2015). Margaret MacDiarmid was trained as a doctor but she was minister of Education, then Tourism, Trade and Investment (Education Minister Margaret MacDiarmid: she’s baaaaack, Noel Herron, 29 Nov 2010), then Minister of Health (for less than a year).

In Manitoba, it was found that the MLA’s were presumably too busy with their photo-ops or doing nothing (same thing really) to know, or care, that foster children were being warehoused in motels.  And most staff weren’t qualified to look after the children.   The community put in the complaint.  And, similar to the future post “Our Information is Not Protected”, apparently the politicians lied and had actually known about it for 20 years and did nothing.  Kids warehoused in hotels not a new story in Manitoba, Tom Brodbeck, 3 Oct 2014, Sun News.  It isn’t a new story.  Minister promises bed for foster children displaced by Grey Cup, 10 Nov 2006, CBC News.  The MLA’s promised, in October 2014 to fix the situation but six months later the situation was even worse.  Last year a young girl was murdered.  Recently, a young girl was assaulted and nearly killed.  Family Services Minister Kerri Irvin-Ross called the assault a “cowardly attack on a vulnerable child”.  What a hypocrite.  After all, isn’t that what the turdits have been doing to these children for 20 years. The turdits were able to move the children out of the hotels within 60 days, although they don’t say where to or for how long.  They also hired more permanent, and presumably, qualified staff.  So, they can do it.  But apparently only when it hits the news.  Manitoba vows action after teen attacked, Kathryn Blaze Carlson, 02 Apr 2015, The Globe and Mail. Watchdog says lack of foster spots keep Manitoba children in jail longer, 15 Apr 2015, The Globe and Mail; Manitoba on track to end hotel placements, minister says, Kathryn Blaze Carlson, 28 May 2015, The Globe and Mail

And we know how the children in BC have suffered even though Mary-Ellen Turpel-Lafond fights the turdits (see prior post “Children Hurt, Dying in Care of Politicians” April 12, 2013); Canadian foster care in crisis, experts say, The Canadian Press,19 Feb 2012, CBC News; The Foster Care Discussion BC Politicians Ignore, Pieta Wooley, 13 May 2013,, Over 1,000 BC Kids Wait on Adoption Changes, Katie Hyslop, 19 Jun 2014,; Families No Longer First in BC, Says Children’s Rep, Katie Hyslop, 09 Oct 2014,;   MCFD  approval of child restraint, confinement “inconceivable”: child and youth rep, Katie Hyslop, 07 Feb 2013,

How low into the cesspools do you have to sink to treat children, any children much less those already suffering, in this way. People hire these politicians and pay taxes so the children are cared for, but the depraved turdits prefer to line their pockets on the backs of little children.   But some people think we have a duty to vote for these monsters.

What do the turdits think of the citizens? Well, one politician said (and I paraphrase) that it didn’t matter what the politicians did, the people would still vote.  Aren’t we suckers.  Such contempt for the people.

So, apparently all you need to qualify as a politician is the ability to lie (to lie effectively is preferred but not required), to schmooze, to do exactly what you are told and nothing more, and you must lack morals and ethics. We could get clapping seals, puppets or parrots to represent us.  And, at least, it would be honest, a lot cheaper and we could accomplish so much with the savings.

You may also want to read a book called Tragedy in the Commons by Alison Loat and Michael MacMillan.

This is from a commenter whose name I have misplaced (my apologizes): “Very few in society work so little, for so much”.  So true.

And to quote Robert Reich: “It’s whether an economic system can survive when those at the top get giant rewards no matter how badly they screw up while the rest of us get screwed no matter how hard we work.” Biggest Myth About Inequality Is We Can’t Fix It, Andrew MacLeod, 06 Feb 2014,

I don’t think they really know what they are doing which is partly why they don’t want to explain it to us; the other part is that when they do know what they are doing they know it is corrupt. No wonder things never get fixed.  We just keep rehashing the same problems.

  1. Our Money Used for their benefit – if we got rid of the politicians and their theft, porkbarrelling, kickbacks, enriching their friends, unnecessary advertising, buying their post-political jobs, and so on, we could probably eliminate homelessness, take care of the children, prevent the selling/trading/bartering of the citizens, especially the vulnerable/sick/newborns/children, and give all people a decent living, and more.


a) Buying Votes – Government favours infrastructure projects to Conservative ridings, Bill Curry and Chris Hannay, 14 Jul 2015, The Globe and Mail; ‘Rules were broken’ over G8/G20 summit spending: Auditor-General, Jason Fekete, 06 Oct 2011. National Post

b) “This advertising, this information just happens to be the same as the government’s own election platform, using public funds for partisan purposes; possibly $600 million over 10 years; “a government must not be allowed to use public money to fund promotional ads for itself”; Globe Editorial, And now, a completely non-partisan word from your Harper government, 18 Nov 2014, Globe and Mail; A message from the Harper government, editorial, 19 Nov 2014; Clark propaganda starts here with $15-million taxpayer-funded ad campaigns, Bill Tieleman, 19 Nov 2012, 24 Hours; Watchdog Group Wants Audit of Taxpayer-Funded Ads, Jeremy J. Nuttall, 28 Apr 2015,

I received two pamphlets and a booklet in less than 2 weeks, in this case from the conservative MP in my riding, promoting the conservative agenda. Since it is not regarding information specifically related to my riding or even the province I live in, and it doesn’t say “paid for by the conservative party”, I must assume that I, and you, are paying for their campaigning.   They are so arrogant that they flaunt it in our faces, “we are stealing from you” so vote for us.  These people may be seriously braindead, I’m not.  And I continued to receive this campaign material until the election.

(c) Christy’s inconvenience – BC Premier Christy Clark was voted out by the people in her riding so she had Ben Stewart, the MLA for Westside-Kelowna, step down (a safe Liberal riding) so she could run in a by-election in his riding (only cost the BC citizens about $500,000).  And after she won she didn’t want Stewart still wandering around in the riding and she had to “reward” him so she created a new position, B.C.’s trade and investment commissioner for Asia based in Beijing and off he and his family went to China.  He will promote products such as BC wine, with his own winery no doubt at the top of the list.  So, the citizens pay for his wages ($150,000-a-year), his moving expenses, his new office expenses, possibly housing expenses, and other expenses including benefits and pension. (Could Premier Clark Go from Safe to Sorry in Kelowna’s Byelection?, Bill Tieleman, 25 Jun 2013,; Christy Clark’s New Ending Campaign, Bob Mackin, 14 May 2014,

Shortly afterwards, Christy started charging the disabled for wheelchair maintenance.  (Seniors Still Spun by BC Liberal Wheelchair Tax, Bill Tieleman, 10 Sep 2013,

To pay for her “inconvenience” she will limit the number of people who care for the children and if the children die, as they have, she apparently doesn’t care. She started charging the disabled for wheelchair maintenance – that brought in a few extra dollars, cut back on ferry service, etc. After all paying for her “inconvenience” is more important.

So whenever I think of Ben Stewart, his family, and/or his wine, I think of the children being abused/dying, I think of the disabled forced to pay for wheelchair maintenance, I think of the number of homeless who could have had a home, I think of the First Nations without safe drinking water.

d) $3.1 billion missing (Where the heck’s that $3.1-billion? Where’s the fury – Lawrence Martin, 19 Nov 2013, The Globe and Mail).  How do you lose $3.1 billion, never to be found?  In my opinion, I think they know exactly whose pocket has the money.

e) Parliamentary secretary positions have been described as “empty titles” used to mollify MLAs who would have preferred to be ministers, but they do come with pay of about $15,000 more per year. (‘Empty titles’ come with $15,000 a year bonus pay, Andrew MacLeod, 18 Mar 2011,

Some people may think these are small amounts but a few “empty titles” could pay another social worker to look after the children, each empty title would take a homeless person off the streets and so on. It all adds up.

f) All the scandals and their continuation. I don’t expect people to be perfect but this is sooo far beyond. Then we have to pay for the investigation, the court cases, the lawyers and usually nothing of consequence happens to the criminals. And most, or all, of it is covered up. We just get all the bills, ex. Vasi/Birk ($6 million+) after they pleaded guilty, Health ministry firings (see future post “Our Information Is Not Protected), Kim Haakstad and Ethnicgate, Nigel Wright, Pamela Martin, Mike Duffy, Chuck Strahl, Brian Bonney and Mark Robertson and others.  (List of Canadian Political Scandals, Wikipedia lists a few scandals); the G8/G20 spending scandal, (‘Rules were broken’ over G8/G20 summit spending: Auditor-General, Jason Fekete, 06 Oct 2011, Postmedia News)

g) Politicians do things for political reasons, to benefit their friends and their own grandeur, not for what is best for the people, the provinces, or the country. In BC, the politicians promised that if they got the olympics, they would eliminate homelessness. They got the olympics, the homeless are still homeless. The politicians got what they wanted, with front row seats, and, well, the homeless are still on the streets. Budgets get balanced, or at least give the pretence of being balanced, at election time when it’s politically convenient  (Canada’s deficit drama is all theatre, 29 Jan 2015, Globe and Mail).  BC was “funding a municipality without any citizens” (Jumbo Resort’s Last-Minute Construction Push, Judith Lavoie, 11 Oct 2014, Desmog Canada).  And, of course, lots of OUR money is spent around election time buying our votes.

Instead of putting forth, honestly, what the problems are and how they plan to resolve them, in order to win the next election, the politicians lie, manipulate, using fear and any other tactic to coerce people into voting for them. And don’t tell me that this is how the system works because I don’t believe this is how it was meant to work but the turdit’s create the system that works for them.

h) Cronyism. – “Cronyism is partiality to long-standing friends, especially by appointing them to positions of authority, regardless of their qualifications. Hence, cronyism is contrary in practice and principle to meritocracy. Cronyism exists when the appointer and the beneficiary are in social contact. Often, the appointer is inadequate to hold his or her own job or position of authority, and for this reason the appointer appoints individuals who will not try to weaken him or her, or express views contrary to those of the appointer. Politically, “cronyism” is derogatorily used.[1]” (wikipedia). These people are appointed to ministries, boards of government, semi-government organizations, the Senate and so forth. For example:  Clark supporter gets Lotto Board gig; patronage appointment; Clark Supporter Gets Lotto Board Gig, Bob Mackin, 06 Jan 2014,; Clark accused of ‘cronyism’ over contract with insider, 22 Nov. 2011, CTV News; Harper’s patronage appointments become a holiday tradition, Andy Radia, 23 Dec 2011, Yahoo News

“It is a real Liberal inside family,” Corrigan said outside the house. “It is Liberal-appointed boards of the universities and colleges who are employing Liberal insiders to lobby the Liberal government. It just goes round and round.” Universities Spend Big Bucks to Bend Government’s Ear, Andrew MacLeod, 25 Feb 2015,

It’s interesting how many politcians, no longer elected, are appointed to boards, organizations, etc. Ex. Colin Hansen, former minister of various things was appointed to the Treasury Board and the Select Standing Committee on Health (Colin Hansen – Wikipedia); Jessica Mcdonald, former deputy minister to previous BC premier Gordon Campbell, was appointed CEO of BC Hydro, who has no experience in the energy sector.  Former top bureaucrat to take helm of BC Hydro, Justine Hunter and Wendy Stueck, 29 May 2014, The Globe and Mail.  It doesn’t look like they did a nation-wide search for the most qualified person.

BC appoints the majority of board members to the universities, transit and health authorities, police boards and regional economic development bodies. Many of these board members are contributors to the BC Liberal party. (UBC Feud Casts Light on Who Sits On University. Agency Boards, Dermod Travis, 31 Aug 2015, IntegrityBC).  And I’m sure there are many other examples.

Lobbyists play “leadership roles in the parties’ campaigns”, federally and provincially. They “build relationships with elected officials”, and, let’s face it, a debt is owed by the politicians which is paid by the people.  (Lobbyists gather in Conservative war room, Simon Doyle, 07 Aug 2015, The Globe and Mail)

i) Donations are given to politicians and their parties, and some of those people/corporations receive contracts/special policies, etc. for what appears to be paybacks. This is sometimes called “buying politicians”. This benefits the politicians and their parties and the people/corporations involved at a cost to the taxpayers/citizenry because the decisions are not made in the best interest of the citizenry. Everyone knows this but we keep letting it happen.  Money going out right and left, from the taxpayers, into the pockets of a few people.

5.  Facade Organizations. I don’t waste time writing about what the politicians should do because I know they won’t do it. They may make laws or policies that sound good, to placate the normal people, but then ignore the laws/policies. They will create organizations, such as the privacy commissioner’s office, so people think they have rights until they try to exercise those rights. Then they find out that the organization is just a sham, a facade, that does nothing but covers for the politicians and their friends (with the occasional exception).  Someone referred to the people in these organizations as obstructionists.  And it is true.  They are hired to obstruct the citizens’ complaints and right to honest answers to questions.  They are the barrier between the citizenry and the politicians who are suppose to be working on our behalf.  See future post “Facade Organizations” for examples.

6.  The politicians get rid of anyone who serves the people, not them, ex. Auditor general John Doyle (see posts “Auditor General Apr 13 2013 and Auditor General – PARIS report May 24 2010), Alana James (see future post “Our Information Is Not Protected”) and Edgar Schmidt (Edgar Schmidt, 23 May 2014, Voices).

People with ethics, morals, integrity, principles don’t go into politics or don’t stay long (only long enough to learn that you give up your ethics, morals, integrity, principles or get out).

  1. Lies. The politicians will promise you anything before an election and then do whatever they want after the election. Examples: HST, accountability & transparency…  Christy Clark campaigned, in the last BC election, on fiscal restraint.  Immediately after the election political staff got huge pay raises, no doubt believing it would be forgotten by the next election (not everyone forgets).  She ended up having to rescind some increases but her intent was obvious.  Her staffers get huge rewards and everyone else…well, who cares, they can just work a little harder, work a little longer, or go hungry/homeless… to pay for Christy’s friends.  And, it wasn’t long before Christy was telling people, like teachers, that there was no money for their pay increases.  Opposition questions hikes to political aide salaries, 11 Jun, 2013, CBC News; Barbara Yaffe:  B.C. To Christy Clark – Rollback ‘incendiary’ pay hikes, now, Barbara Yaffe, 12 Jun 2013, Vancouver Sun (a paper I never bought); Teachers Strike ‘Imminent’ as Sides Remain Far Apart, 16 Jun 2014,; BC Libs Give Secret Payouts, but No One Pays for Breaking the Rules, Bill Tieleman, 22 Jul 2014,
  2. Biggest Law Breakers. These are “people” who believe they are, and operate, above the law. They will write policies/laws so you think they are doing something beneficial, then they will ignore/violate those same policies/laws;.  They do not work for OUR interests.  When you go to access the laws/regulations you find that the government doesn’t enforce them because it would be inconvenient to them and their friends; the laws are just a farce, a facade, words on paper to con the people.

For example:

a.  Proposing/Passing legislation in violation of the Charter of Freedom and Rights. Government Lawyer Edgar Schmidt courageously blows the whistle: Editorial, 19 Jan 2013, Toronto Star

b.  The government has ignored the privacy legislation and privacy commissioners. Some examples: The Canadian Government Wants To Pay Someone to Creep Your Facebook, Ben Makuch, 13 Nov 2014, Motherboard; Veteran advocate’s privacy breached, Murray Brewster, 13 Feb 2012, The Chronicle Herald; Privacy Commissioner Slams Bill C-51, Jeremy J. Nuttall, 06 Mar 2015,; Commissioner raps health ministry for attack on privacy, Andrew MacLeod, 23 Apr 2010,;  Health minister ‘fundamentally disagrees’ with commissioner’s privacy worries, Andrew MacLeod, 28 Apr 2010,; B.C. Government charges ahead with ID card, despite major privacy and transparency concerns, 08 Jan 2013, FIPA; Bill easing research access to ehealth data sparks privacy fears, Craig McInnes, 03 May 2012, Vancouver Sun; Bill C-51: Privacy watchdog Daniel Therrien blocked from committee witness list, Kady O’Malley, 12 Mar 2015, CBC News

  1. Illegally accessing our online information. Some examples: CSE monitors millions of Canadian emails to government – Critics question how long data is stored and what it’s used for, Amber Hildebrandt, Dave Seglins, Michael Pereira, 25 Feb 2015, CBC News; Creepy Canada, Mitchell Anderson, 11 Feb. 2014,; How Canada Can End Mass Surveillance, David Christopher, 27 May 2015,; Supreme Court to Personal Data Plunderers:  Get a Warrant!, Michael Geist, 22 Jul 2014,
  2. Illegally destroying emails. Some examples: Rachel Notley puts halt to shredding at Alberta legislature pending probe, Dean Bennett, 13 May 2015, CTV News; Doubling Down on The Dobell Doctrine, Ross Kat, 09 Nov 2011, The Gazetteer; Former BC Gov’t Staffer Alleges He Was Told To Erase Records, Andrew MacLeod, 29 May 2015,; BC Government Put Itself Above the Law with Email Deletions, Paul Wiollcocks, 28 Oct 2015,
  3. Ignoring the courts and the Parliament of Canada Act. The politicians certainly wouldn’t want people to know the impact of budget cuts. Ottawa denies nearly half of budget officer’s requests, Paul McLeod, 27 Jan 2014. The Chronicle Herald
  4. a mayor owes a duty of care to their residents to ensure maintenance and other standards are enforced but they often don’t thereby forcing people to suffer, governments ask questions on forms that they have no legal right to ask, they illegally share our health information, they steal DNA from newborn babies, and so on.
  5. “Ottawa is drawing up an inventory of protesters” – I don’t know if this is illegal but it should be. The state gets more intrusive, again, Lawrence Martin, 17 Feb 2015, The Globe and Mail.

They should apply the law and teach respect for it by example. Instead, they break the law whenever it is inconvenient TO THEM and thereby teach disrespect for the law and the politicians.

When I am asked to provide information I ask them about any questions I think unnecessary. Under the privacy act they are suppose to tell you why they want the information and the reason has to be logical.  I usually get a response such as “because it’s on the form” or “ because the computer asks for it”.  This is not a real answer.  So I contact management.  And they usually end up saying that I don’t need to answer the question.  And I get a phone number to directly contact the manager (or other title) if I have any further problems.  When I recommend that they change the form to indicate that the question is optional I am usually told that “they will consider it”.  They don’t of course.  They just want to shut me up by giving me special treatment so they can continue stealing from others who do not know the laws or are too timid to stand up for their rights.

  1. Revolving Door. A situation in which people with experience in an industry take government jobs in agencies that set policy for that industry and in which government employees take private-sector jobs in order to use their connections and knowledge to favourably influence government policy regarding their industry. (The Free Dictionary). This often leads to conflicts of interest to the detriment of the citizenry. For example, a government employee may make policy favourable to the industry in return for a high-level job/directorship in the industry.  Or a person in industry may take a government job for the sole purpose of setting policy/regulations favourable to the industry and not in the best interests of the citizenry.  Examples of people who have gone from government to industry:  Clark Aide Joins Firm that Lobbies for Kinder Morgan (and lobbies for, at least, one drug company), Bob Mackin, 25 Nov 2013; Former Tory minister on the hot seat over Enbridge lobbying gig, Kady O’Malley, 07 Jan 2014, Inside Politics; Crony Capitalism?: Revolving Door between Telecom-Media-Internet Industries in Canada, 08 Aug 2011, Dwayne Winseck’s Media Blog; Government Ethics Coalition, Democracy Watch; Harper not doing enough to end cozy relationship between lobbyists and politicians, critics say, Stephen Maher, 09 Mar 2015, National Post; Ex-BC Gov’t Gambling Boss Apologizes for Conflict of Interest, Bob Mackin, 11 Jul 2014,


  1. Culture of Secrecy. Some (most) MLA’s, MPP’s, MNA’s, and MP’s won’t answer any questions or they provide a non-answer, others only answer questions if it makes them look good and they are spewing the party propaganda so we don’t know what is going on except what the turdits tell us (muzzling the press, scientists, politicians, etc.) .


They won’t tell us who has access to our information (medical and otherwise) or how it is being used.


They refuse to tell us how they are spending the citizens money or why, ex. BC Place roof, Vasi/Birk.


The politicians and their lackeys use personal email to avoid freedom of information requests. Some examples: Libs Quick Wins Plan Didn’t Break the Law, Bob Mackin, 01 Aug 2013,; Doubling Down on the Dobell Doctrine, Ross Kat, 09 Nov 2012, The Gazetteer; Probe Details How Clark, Aides Erased Communication Trail, Bob Mackin, 04 Mar 2013,


They shove through omnibus bills with little or no time to read or debate, sometimes its budget bills have non-budget items, usually because there are changes to laws that they don’t want brought to light or debated or compromised so they want to hide (bury) it in the omnibus bills and ram it through. Some examples: federal bills C-51, C-38, and C-45.   A monster loose on parliament hill, 13 May 2015, The Globe and Mail; Thrown Under the Omnibus:  C-51 The Latest In Harper’s Barrage of Sprawling Undemocratic Bills, Carol Linnitt, 07 May 2015,; With Elections Act, Canada Slides into Ventriloquism Democracy, Michael Harris, 31 Mar 2014,; Feds Massively Changing Trademark Law with No Debate, Michael Geist, 22 Apr 2014,; 10 reasons to oppose the Conservatives’ Bill C-38, Chloe Makepeace, 12 June 2012,


“Referencing such bills, former auditor general Sheila Fraser said that ‘Parliament has become so undermined that it is almost unable to do the job that people expect of it.”‘  Harper, Serial Abuser of Power:  The Evidence Compiled, David Beers and Tyee Staff and Contributors, 10 Aug 2015,


What are they doing to us that they have to hide it?


This culture of secrecy allows them to be neither accountable nor transparent. Is that democracy??


  1. Propaganda – 1500 Communications Staffers (estimated)(federal) – Not only are they trying to brainwash us but think of the cost of paying all these people. But then, we will just have to work a little harder, a little longer or do without. Some Examples:  PM Harper takes communications strategy to new level, Laura Ryckewaert, 21 Nov 2011, The Hill Times online; Tories eager to outsource more ad work, 19 Jan 2012, The Globe and Mail;  Clark propaganda starts here with $15-million taxpayer-funded ad campaign, Bill Tieleman, 19 Nov 2012, 24 Hours.


The politicians’ communication departments or imbedded journalists write exactly what the politicians want them to write. Part of the problem is that it is frequently not identified as information directly from politicians or their communications department and people are led to believe that the person writing the article has researched the topic and is “independent”.  What is written is misleading at best.


Harper had decided to name a building after a politician and this person was given a state funeral.  Why? He wasn’t better than anyone else, just a government employee. Why don’t they name the building after a fallen soldier, someone who gave the ultimate for his/her country instead of a government employee who was never in the line of fire.  It’s all about exploiting the deceased politician to make themselves look important, saint-like, so people won’t see that they are really bottom-feeders.  It’s the same as using the titles like “honourable” and “Your Worship”.  If it’s said enough times people might actually believe it and not see that the opposite is true.


If you were in business and the person you hired, your employee, did what these politicians do, how long would they be working for you? If you have any common sense it wouldn’t be for long.  And if you kept getting the same type of employee, what would you do?  Give up and keep paying them to lie, steal, hide information, etc. from you or would you start to look for a new way of doing business that did not require hiring lying thieves?


As long as we keep voting nothing will change. Why would it?  The politicians and their friends have the system they want?


Voting is akin to someone saying that they are coming to your home next week to steal from you and they would like you to keep the door unlocked and you do.


I consider it my duty NOT to vote for those turdits called politicians who destroy my rights, my democracy. I owe it to all those who died, who have suffered to protect my rights, my democracy to try to change the whole system, to not support the turdits (with the exception of this last federal election as noted above, in hopes of minimizing the damage being done).


As long as people vote, the turdits are going to be there; they can say that the people want them, that the people support them


These are not leaders, they are not our representatives, they are parasites.


To quote a commenter, Igbymac, “…they (voters) are the water that nourishes this insatiable thirst for power” and “voting itself disqualifies anyone from complaining since this corrupt, self- serving system cannot exist without people breathing life into it with their endorsement at the voting booth”.


Personally, I just want the turdits to stay away from me from now until forever. And that goes for their families, who benefit from everything the turdits steal from us and do to us.  There will be the rare exception, a politician who stands up to the other politicians and shows that he/she works “for the people” but, as mentioned before, they don’t last long.


You can read a list of some of the abuses of power by Harper and his Conservative party. These are just more examples of what politicians do to us.  Harper, Serial Abuser of Power:  The Evidence Compiled, David Beers and Tyee Staff and Contributors, 10 Aug 2015,


The next few posts will be more political because it is the politicians who are responsible for protecting, but far more often destroy, our privacy, our rights, our democracy. A future post gives some examples of what you can do, that does not include voting.

It’s interesting all the excuses people come up with for why people don’t vote except the obvious – they are revolted and fed up by the turdits called politicians. But the excuses are just another political ploy to try to manipulate people by trying to make them feel guilty; if you had voted this would/would not have happened; the “blame the people” tactic.   There is, however, a slow, but growing recognition, by intelligent people, that many informed people chose not to vote because they are just disgusted by the turdits and their friends.  They know that their vote would make minimal, or no, difference except to legitimize the politicians (there are rare exceptions).   They are now called anti-voters.

The Environics Institute “found Canadians expressing civic disengagement in a number of ways besides voting. These included signing petitions, sharing political information online, and participating in demonstrations and protests”.  (7)

Now BC Bill 20, passed by the BC Liberals, “would allow political parties and others to know who voted in the previous election”. (1) They will be given your name and address (and possibly more), and whether you voted and then they go “dig” for more information. Well, they don’t have to do much digging; it’s one-stop shopping for information in BC.  This will allow them to harrass you, ridicule you, discriminate against you or blackmail you (do you work in government, have a contract with government or does your boss have friends in the government, do you receive money through the government), into voting because THEY need people to vote to justify their existence.

Bill Tieleman says they already have that information, that inside scrutineers pass the information to outside scrutineers (party workers). Well, they should not have it.  Remember the workers are just people who walk into the campaign office and volunteer, no screening required.  The information already given to the politicians and their “workers” tells them, or implies, your gender, whether you live alone, a phone call will tell if you are elderly, etc.  So this information puts you in harms way.

Bill 20 does say in the act that the information is only for the purposes of the act, not commercialization. There are a lot of ways this bill can harm people that does not involve “overt” commercialization.

It also states that political parties/candidates/individuals must file a privacy policy acceptable to the chief electoral officer. That is better than nothing but what is “acceptable” to the chief electoral officer and are they serious about this or are these just “words on paper” as is normal for the government?  What “individuals” would want this information and why?

Will this information be linked to your database profile to sell/trade/barter, next year or some future year? After all, our medical/personal information is suppose to be used only for our health care and yet it is linked to citizens driver’s licence.  And your history of voting, or not, will be maintained in the government database so it can be used for whatever purpose now, and in the future.

“It’s when people do not vote that we get into trouble. Not when we find out that they actually did.”  No, not voting is the sympton.  The disease, or when we get into trouble, is when politicians quit working for us and do all the things listed in the next post and a lot more despicable things.  I think there would be a lot more people voting if the politicians had some integrity, ethics, morals, transparency, and accountability but that is sooo un-politician.  I don’t think it’s a coincidence that as trust in politicians/government decline, as belief that we have a healthy democracy declines so does voter participation.  (6, 7)

Some people think we have a duty to vote. I disagree.  We have an duty to defend/get back/evolve our democracy, freedom and rights.  Voting is a tool.  If the tool isn’t working then you discard it and find another tool.  And, I would feel PROUD, not shamed, for NOT voting to defend my province/country against the destroyers of my democracy/rights/freedoms.   I do not have to be on the frontline of a foreign battlefield to defend my country; I can defend my country by doing things such as not voting.

Bill Tieleman defends the bill by saying that Washington state in the USA does it. Well, apparently that automatically makes it right and democratic (sarcasm alert).  After all, the US is listed No.19 on the world democracy index (as defined by the Economist Intelligence Unit), whereas Canada is listed No. 7. (8)  I guess we need to sink lower.

The bill, apparently, isn’t asking to know how people vote but I’m sure that will be next. After all, I have read that the U.S. asks people for their political affiliation.

Also, “the digital revolution has fuelled intensive data analysis south of the border that allows political parties to zero in on people who support rival candidates and then find ways to prevent them from voting”. (The Canadian Press, 22 Sept 2015, The Globe and Mail.  So, the less information parties have on specific voters the better.

Green party MLA Andrew Weaver spoke out against the bill. Weaver says it is an end run around the privacy of British Columbians. (3) “Government watchdog Integrity BC, and B.C.’s privacy commissioner also oppose the bill.” (4)  A poll was done regarding Bill Tieleman’s article and 62% of the people voted for “not only how I voted but that I voted at all should be private”. (1)

BC MLA Moira Stilwell also spoke out against the bill. She said “’she could not find one constituent in her riding who thought it was smart to allow political parties to have voter information, including if someone had voted or not.  They couldn’t see the line between how it would help get people who don’t vote to vote or how it would help to secure governance and enforcement of voting rights.’ Stilwell says giving political parties information like that would be like ‘throwing chum in the water to attract sharks’.  She added the distribution of voter information in the bill are in the interest of political parties and not BC voters.” (2)  I commend her for speaking out but then she just does as her political master tells her, not what the people tell her, and votes for the bill.  And, of course, the other politicians again gave the finger to the people and passed the bill (5).  It’s all about what the politicians want, the people be damned.

I think this just illustrates the desperation of the politicians to get people to vote to legitimize their “power”. I expect the demand by politicians, and their shills, for mandatory voting will also increase.  Anything but giving people a real reason to vote.

How to get people out to vote? Putting “none of the above” on the ballot is one way, if ethics, morals, integrity, transparency and accountability are too much for the politicians.




  1. B.C.’s Bill 20 will combat apathy, Bill Tieleman, 18 May 2015, 24 Hours
  2. BC Liberal MLA breaks party ranks over bill to encourage people to vote, Shane Woodford, 11 May 2015, CKNW
  3. Green party says Bill 20 privacy concerns now much worse, Shane Woodford, 14 May 2015, CKNW
  4. A Know-Who-Voted Bill? Bring It On, Bill Tieleman, 19 May 2015,
  5. Bill 20 – 2015, Election Amendment Act, 2015, Third Reading, 26 May 2015
  6. Standing at Door of 2014: Who Shapes the ‘Next’ Canada?, Michael Valpy, 06 Jan 2014,
  7. Many Canadians aren’t voting. Have they stopped caring about democracy?, Michael Adams and Maryantonett Flumian, 26 Jan 2015, The Globe and Mail
  8. Democracy Index, Wikipedia



Are the politicians selling/trading/bartering (it’s all the same thing) us? Are we a product, a commodity, to be sold?

In B.C. researchers (whoever they are because we’re not told), claim that privacy laws make it difficult to access patient information. “Instead of asking why should we open things up, what we really want to ask is, why shouldn’t we?” observed Margaret MacDiarmid, Minister of Labour, Citizens’ Services and Open Government (1). You’ll find this statement particularly interesting when you read future post “Our Information Is Not Protected” (the privacy/firing scandal).

Point 1 – That should be the purpose of privacy laws, to make our information difficult to access.

Point 2 – Evidence proves that our information is, in fact, not protected (2).  Apparently the problem, for researchers, is that the information is not linked so they have to go to different databases.  And they want to track us.  All without OUR explicit consent and knowledge.

Richard Rosenberg, professor emeritus in computer science at the University of B.C. and a spokesman for the B.C. Civil Liberties Association, said patients should have the right to determine whether their medical records can be used for research. “The argument shouldn’t be that because we’re doing good work, we should have access to whatever we want.” (1)

Point 3 – Are they all doing good work?   We don’t know because we don’t know who THEY are or what THEY are doing.  Many research/pharmaceutical/biotechnology firms, etc. have been charged for various crimes. (17, 18, 19, 23 – I could not find any Canadian charges against pharmaceuticals – interesting!!)  And the government has been caught experimenting on Aboriginal children and adults (3, 4), and giving permission for experimentation on psychiatric patients and others (9, 10, 11, 12, 13).  This information never comes to light until many years later, if at all, because the government hides the information.   An article written by Les Perreaux and Sandra Rubin states:

“The courts may be the final barrier to protect Canadians from unfettered genetic experimentation as scientists abandon public interest research in favour of corporate funding and ambitious, cutting-edge science, lawyers heard yesterday”.

“The independent scientist who conducts research for the public good ‘barely   exists any more,’ according to one leading expert on technology and public policy”.                                                                                                                                                                                                    ‘They get up and talk as if they are neutral.  But they almost always have some share in the company or some self-interested gain for their work,” said Philip Bereano, a professor from the University of Washington in Seattle. (5)  Also, read future post “Follow the Money”.

Iceland and Newfoundland provide an example of how your information can be sold/traded/bartered. In Iceland, the most famous example, a single company, deCode Genetics landed a monopoly on the national genome after acquiring exclusive access to the national health data base.  …The fundamentals of genetics are still being debated, questions such as whether companies should be allowed to patent human genes.

An article in the Financial Post states: “…which makes Newfoundland something of a motherlode to the drug development industry.  Indeed, despite the fact that modern genetics is still in its infancy, the race to exploit Newfoundlanders’ genetic heritage has become so intense that some groups have been accused of “helicopter genetics” – basically, rushing in, grabbing a few blood samples, then jetting off to file the necessary patents.  There is now a growing belief among political leaders of the province that Newfoundlanders should maintain control over their unique genome.  But the politicians are faced with a tough dilemma:  How do you build a wall without scaring off the wealthy customers?  It is “becoming an increasingly treacherous debate about ethics and profit”. (6)

There is a story about Henrietta Lacks, a woman from Baltimore, who, 60 years ago had her cancer cells taken without consent (isn’t that called theft? And unethical?). Those cells (called HeLa) were used in the biotech industry and helped create medical treatments.  “Neither she nor her family ever shared in the ‘untold riches’ but they recently gained ‘some control over scientists access to the cells’ DNA code.”  “Since DNA is inherited, information from her DNA could be used to make predictions about the disease risk and other traits of her modern-day descendants.“  “The main issue was the privacy concern and what information in the future might be revealed,’ “David Lacks Jr. said in a news conference.”  “In the past the Lacks family had been left in the dark about research stemming from HeLa cells.” (7)

So, is your DNA, and other body parts (fluids, etc.) and information, being sold/traded/bartered? Are the politicians encouraging companies to locate in BC in exchange for our personal information?  Is the government and their lackeys (for example, the corporations that run the hospitals, the universities) outright selling it?  When you donate blood, are they taking a sample and putting it in a DNA data bank for use by all of THEM.  “The Province had commenced programs and financing to attract major drug companies to British Columbia,” the notice said. “Also, the Liberal Party was receiving significant contributions from these drug companies.  And I wouldn’t be surprised to find that the politicians are lining their pockets in other ways by selling/trading/bartering us. (16)

And what about all the other increasing amounts of information that is being collected on us. The government calls it an “’e-government’ strategy – a comprehensive identity management system meant to facilitate online access to government services and the integration of databases that contain citizen’s personal information.” (20)  ‘Crime and convenience are the ways these things are always sold’, Mr. Gogolek said.  ‘They were using that with the fraud argument, but now it’s being portrayed as some kind of convenience card.’ (21)  What you end up with is one card with ALL your personal information, accessible to almost anyone who has your card number.  The government can’t/won’t protect it.  If it is in a database it is accessible (ask anyone who works in information technology, ie computers).  But now THEY don’t have to try to access different databases, it’s one stop shopping for all your information.  A hacker just has to hack one database, a government employee just has to access one database.  If the government says your information is protected, ask them to prove it because there is a load of evidence to show they DON’T protect our information (see my past/future posts, The Tyee, newspapers…)  You might also want to read Orwell’s book called1984 (I’m sure it’s at the public libraries).

Do they even want it protected? If it is discovered that a company/individual has your personal information, the politicians can hide the fact that it has been sold/traded/bartered by saying that it has been stolen.  After all, it isn’t as if we are dealing with honest, ethical, caring people.

When the LNG doesn’t provide the big tax flow the politicians promised, they have another source to generate income. (14) The government will cover up the loss of projected revenue by selling more of us (our information, our DNA, etc).

In fact, the government “was actively discussing selling patient health information to private companies”, around 2012. (8)  But why else would they be collecting a treasure trove of information?  (1)  I have also been told that, although the BC Hospital Act prescribes keeping patient information for 10 years, there is a BC directive that all hospital records be kept indefinitely.  (from email) Is this true?  Well, unlike anywhere else, B.C. has digitalized records of every prescription filled by a pharmacist since 1995, all doctor billings, hospital admissions and treatments from the same period, and results of all blood tests done since 2002. (1)  And some information has been kept since 1985 (see post “I’ve Returned).

This may also be a case where the government is already selling/trading/bartering us because “…policy trumped the law and government could do what it wants even if it breaches the law and legislation.” (22)  And, “…it doesn’t matter what the legislation says, we have government policy; that it’s unfortunate that we don’t follow the law but that we plan on changing the legislation at some point so that we will, so it’s ok for now.” (22) (see future post “Our Information is Not Protected”).

The law that allows the medical business to steal from us is immoral and unethical. It is legalized theft but theft nonetheless when you take from people without their explicit consent, and in most cases, without their knowledge.

As Micheal Vonn, of the BCCLA (British Columbia Civil Liberties Association), says:

“It’s not a conspiracy, it’s a business plan!”.


  1. Plan to unlock B.C.’s trove of medical data raises privacy concerns. Rod Mickleburgh, 18 Apr 2012, The Globe and Mail
  2. Past posts such as Auditor General – PARIS report 5/24/2011, Privacy Breaches 6/6/2011 and future post “Our Information Is Not Protected”
  3. Aboriginal children used in medical tests, commissioner says, Darryl Dyck/Canadian Press, 31 Jul 2013, CBC News
  4. Hungry aboriginal people used in bureaucrats’ experiments, The Canadian Press, 16 Jul 2013, CBC News
  5. Courts protect public against scientific “elite’, 14 Aug 2001, National  Post
  6. Newfoundland a motherlode for geneticists, 24 Jun 2000, Financial Post
  7. Family of Henrietta Lacks, Baltimore woman whose cells were taken without consent, wins recognition for immortal cells, 08 Aug 2013, Malcolm Ritter, Associated Press, National Post.
  8. At Time of Firings, Health Ministry Discussed Selling Patient Data, 20 Mar 2015, Andrew MacLeod,
  9. Mind-Control Part 1: Canadian and U.S. Survivors Seek Justice, Arlene Tyner, March-April 2000 issue (Vol. 7 No. 3), Probe
  10. The McGill mind behind ‘soft torture’, 23 Nov 2005, National Post
  11. CIA Activities in Canada (see the section on Project MKULTRA), Wikipedia
  12. MK-UlTRAViolence, 06 Sept 2012, The McGill Daily
  13. Donald Ewen Cameron, Wikipedia
  14. Premier’s LNG Dreams Given Reality Check By Japanese Expert, Geoff Dembicki, 30 Jun 2014,
  15. Health Worker fired to Protect Liberal Donors, Suit Alleges – Andrew MacLeod, 07 May 2013,
  16. List of the largest pharmaceutical settlements, wiki
  17. GlaxoSmithKline to pay $3 billion healthcare fraud settlement, U.S. Says, Tiffany Hsu, 02 Jul 2012, Los Angeles Times
  18. Nuremberg Trials: Big Pharma’s Crimes Against Humanity, Gabriel Donohoe, 18 Oct 2008, Natural News
  19. Privacy groups demand halt to BC ID Card roll-out. 08 Feb 2013, BC Freedom of Information and Privacy Association (FIPA)
  20. Critics worry ID, Compass cards could be linked, Gordon Hoekstra, 2013/08/16, Vancouver Sun (a paper I do not buy)
  21. Emails Shed Light on Origins of Health Ministry Probe, Firings – Andrew MacLeod, 21 Oct 2014,
  22. Big Pharma behaving badly:  A timeline of settlements, 05 Oct 2010, Fierce Pharma


“The possibility of linking TransLink’s new Compass card to the province’s new identification card raises significant privacy concerns and the possibility that transit users could be tracked by authorities, say privacy advocates.” (1)

“The idea of linking or combining the cards is laid out in a B.C. Government white paper for the new ID card program and in the Transportation Ministry’s technology plan for 2012-13 to 2014-15. The technology plan notes the ministry is working with TransLink and other transportation providers to “identify opportunities” to link their card functions with B.C.’s identity management program or add new functions.”

…the white paper says the B.C. Services identification card could “replace or augment” bus passes and credit cards, becoming a key part of a digital wallet.” (1)

Currently, the Translink information will not be linked (at least not when I left BC) but, no doubt, it will once the new Translink system has been operating for a while. Then all the information they have been collecting will be linked and you probably won’t even hear about it.  If the government wants to know where you were yesterday, all they have to do is check the database. “You will be able to create a picture of their daily commute, bus routes they take, times they tend to do things,” said Josh Paterson of BCCLA. (2)  And, in many instances, you would even be able to draw conclusions as to what stores/homes they visit.  Very useful if you are a thief, marketer, politician/toady or for a variety of other people/organizations.

”’I don’t expect my bus pass to track me,’ said Vincent Gogolek, executive director of the B.C. Freedom of Information and Privacy Association.”(1)

“Gogolek said the concern over adding the functions of the Compass and the ID card is part of a general concern that compiling or linking personal information creates digital personas that are susceptible to identity theft and allows people’s movements to be tracked.’ (1)

‘The province’s privacy commissioner has already raised concerns over the new ID card and its intended expanding uses, including flagging the need for greater encryption of digital personal information of British Columbians held and used by the government. The B.C. Government’s intention is that as the identity program develops, other government services will be accessed online and in person using the card. (1)

I asked a bus driver if I could get a compass card, put money on it by paying cash, without providing any personal information. She said that I could register it through the internet and I explained that I did not want to register it, that I did not want to be tracked.  She then went into this long talk about how we are already tracked in ways we don’t know about so why worry about Translink tracking us.  That is as illogical as saying that a person/organization steals from you so everyone should be able to steal from you.  I repeated my question and she said that there were something like 57 ways to pay and they reduced it to six.  I repeated my question.  She finally said she did not know if you could pay in cash but apparently she knew all the other ways you could pay.  I phoned Translink and I was told that you could get a compass card, put money on it by paying cash, without providing any personal information.  If your card is stolen then you lose the money on it so, if you choose to pay in cash, either be very careful with your card or don’t put a lot of money on it at any one time.  However, I expect the card can still be tracked (no doubt, it will have a number or some other identifier) but they won’t have your name and other information although they may be able to link it to your picture on a bus/skytrain and through facial recognition technology. (3)

If you pay in cash, and don’t use a compass card, then you will have to pay twice if you transfer from a bus to another bus or skytrain and vice versa. Translink said that they failed to take cash fares into consideration and now it would be too expensive to change.  Just think, all those people working on this project for, no doubt, huge amounts of money and they failed to consider something so obvious and basic.  Or, was it intentional to get people to get a compass card so they can be tracked?

Your provincial identification will be available to so many people and businesses/organizations that, in effect, everyone will have it. So, if they want your information, they won’t have to try to find your care card number, they will just access your provincial identification number which will be on file.

There are other reasons for collecting the information. They and their friends will know more about you than you know about yourself.  If you think putting your information on social media is bad, this is worse.  At least with social media you decide what information you provide, if any.  On the government database you won’t have a choice.  Doctors, other people in the government, teachers, etc. can write what they want about you.  Will a potential employer have your information, will your bank, insurance company, etc.?  Just think about all the people you would not like to have access to all your information.  Identity theft is very likely (see future post “Our Information is Not Protected”).  It will put your safety in jeopardy – do you live alone, are you older or disabled, do you have money, are you female?  If the politicians and their lackeys say your information is protected ask them to prove it, starting with listing the names of organizations, people in the organizations, other people, who will have access to your information (physical access, not just legal access, because the government has very “creative” definitions for the term access) and under what circumstances.  Then ask them to prove, and continue to prove, that no one else has access (Remember, the word of a politician, and their toadies, isn’t worth a damn).  If the politicians/lackeys can’t/won’t provide this information, then they are lying to you.   Until such time as the politicians prove to us what they are doing with our information, who has access, under what circumstances, who benefits, who loses, anything is possible.  One thing I know, the politicians, their toadies and friends aren’t doing this for us.  If they were they would have asked us and they wouldn’t have to hide what they are doing.  I do believe that they and their friends will reap the rewards and we will pay the cost – in so many ways.

I thought the following was a very good comment from Mr. Nagotco:

“The fact that a certain behavior is common does not negate its being corrupt. Indeed, as is true for government abuses generally, those in power rely on the willingness of citizens to be trained to view corrupt acts as so common that they become inured, numb, to its wrongfulness. Once a corrupt practice is sufficiently perceived as commonplace, then it is transformed in people’s minds from something objectionable into something acceptable.
Indeed, many people believe it demonstrates their worldly sophistication to express indifference toward bad behavior by powerful actors on the ground that it is so prevalent. This cynicism ‘oh, don’t be naive: this is done all the time’ is precisely what enables such destructive behavior to thrive unchallenged.” (2)

When people tell me “this is done all the time” I just say “that doesn’t make it right” and/or “then it’s time to stop it”.


“British Columbia has one of the most valuable reservoirs of health-care data in the world (bolding mine) … Unlike anywhere else, B.C. has digitalized records of every prescription filled by a pharmacist since 1995, all doctor billings, hospital admissions and treatments from the same period, and results of all blood tests done since 2002” (1).  So, why have they been collecting all this information without our knowledge, much less our permission??

The politicians are now connecting our driver’s license with our medical records and making it our provincial identification. And this is only the beginning of the linking of all your personal information to this one card.  In other words, everything about you will be accessible by one card and one number and everyone to whom you show your provincial ID will know the number to use to access your information (legally or otherwise).  They say that you have a choice to “upgrade” your license or not until 2018, at which time you lose the right to choose.  An “upgrade” for whom?  It certainly isn’t an upgrade for the patients whose information will now become more accessible.  How is this “smart”?  Although I expect this will be an “upgrade” to all the people in the government, the researchers (many, no doubt, from multinational pharmaceutical companies) plus suppliers and everyone else who accesses our information, but not an upgrade for the patients.  What is the purpose except to link all your information to one central database available to all the low-life’s (see future post – our information is not protected).

Acronyms: FIPA – B.C. Freedom of Information and Privacy Association –

BCCLA – BC Civil Liberties Association –

ICM – Integrated Case Management



“…, those tasked with protecting the privacy of British Columbians say the new cards are a form of surveillance and will centralize personal data in a way that makes it attractive to hackers.”

‘When you have that much information stored or linked together, it becomes much more valuable for criminals to attack,’ “said Vincent Gogolek, executive director of the B.C. Freedom of Information and Privacy Association.” (3)
And it’s not only outside criminals but those inside the government (see future post “Our Information Is Not Protected).

“In a statement released today, Information and Privacy Commissioner Elizabeth Denham pointed to a number of shortcomings with the plan, and called for a halt to any further expansion of the Services Card without extensive public consultations on the risks and benefits of data linkage. And while they agree with the pause, the BCCLA and FIPA say that it will take more than a public consultation to fix what’s really broken in the government’s plan.”
“This government has got to come clean on the card before we are all forced to use it,” said Micheal Vonn, BCCLA Policy Director. “British Columbians have been provided almost no real information about it, and the Commissioner herself says she was only given an ‘abbreviated time for review’ of the program.” (4)

The ICM debacle also raises serious concerns over other government IT and identity management projects like the new B.C. Services Card, set to launch in mid-February (2013). “If we’re seeing this level of mismanagement with the ICM, not to mention other government IT programs like JUSTIN and BCeSIS, it’s a pretty safe bet we will see more of the same with the new ID cards. It’s time for a public inquiry into data linkage systems across government before more money is wasted and personal information is compromised.” (5)

See FIPA’s 2010 report on Integrated Case Management, “Culture of Care or Culture of Surveillance?”

“In a legal ruling that cuts to the core of medical privacy in the age of the genome, a woman who nearly died in a Calgary house fire and is suing the landlords for negligence has been ordered to undergo testing for Huntington’s disease, because if she has it, she may be entitled to less compensation.”

“Critics worry that the precedent of forced testing will enable insurance companies and employers to discriminate against people who are merely at risk of genetic illnesses like Huntington’s, and they call Canada an outlier in the developed world because it lacks formal legislative protection for genetic information.” (7)

Another article states “ …authorities are deliberating whether to allow the Chinese company to buy Complete Genomics of California, a major U.S. Sequencing company.” “   ..but the deal has officials there fretting over both the security of genetic data and national security.”

“ …Because the technologies involved “have national security implications related to bioweapons…”.  (6)  Is your information being used to create bioweapons.  We have no idea who is using our information or how it is being used so anything is possible.  The point is that WE should know where our information is going and how it is being used.

– “Heightened national security concerns, the growing business appetite for personal information and technological advances are all potent – and growing – threats to privacy rights,” said Stoddart (privacy commissioner) in a news release.

When I was in BC, I was asked many times, by banks, etc. for my care card number for “identification”. I gave it on one occasion, after being assured that they did not enter it into their system (for whatever that’s worth).  I later decided it would be wiser not to give it again.  In the future post “Our Information Is Not Protected” you will read how our medical information is being shared “without authorization” (illegally), with our identifying number attached and you will understand how the care card number, or B.C. Services card number, can be used to identify you and your medical information.

Your provincial identification will be available to so many people and businesses/organizations that, in effect, everyone will have it. So, if they want your information, they won’t have to try to find your care card number or search through numerous databases, they will have your B.C. Services card number.


(1)   Plan to unlock B.C.’s trove of medical data raises privacy concerns, Rod Mickleburgh, 2012/04/18, Globe & Mail

(2) Security concerns, technological advances threaten privacy. Joan Delaney, 07 Jan 2008, The Epoch Times

(3) B.C.’s new identity cards raise host of privacy concerns, critics say, Luke Simcoe, Metro, 09 Jan 2013

(4) Privacy Groups demand halt to BC ID Card roll-out, FIPA, 08 Feb 2013

(5) Report finds B.C. Government’s $182 million Integrated Case Management system plagued with “fundamental deficiencies”, FIPA, 25 Jan 2013

(6) Why China is a genetic powerhouse with a problem, Carolynn Abraham and Carolynne Wheeler, The Globe and Mail, 15 Dec. 2012

(7) Court orders woman who almost died in fire to undergo tests to prove symptoms not linked to genetic disease, Joseph Brean, 26 Sep 2013, National Post