Canada Customs asks useless questions, wastes time -- and my money

The transcript of the questions asked by the Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA) officer provides much fodder for laughter once you are over the initial frustration. It is borderline insanity (I like the double pun) when you compare the interviews going to and coming back from USA on a recent business trip. 

Going to USA, as a foreign visitor: 

US Customs: Where you going? 
Soothsayer: San Francisco. 
US Customs: What for? 
Soothsayer: To attend a business conference. 
US Customs: For how long? 
Soothsayer: 5 days.
US Customs: *wave of the hand*.... Next?

Coming back "HOME" to Canada, as a Canadian citizen bearing a Canadian passport, with a 'business' trip indicated on my form, declaring $0 in purchases: 

CBSA: Where are you coming from? 
Soothsayer: San Francisco. 
CBSA: Do you have any alcohol or cigarettes on you? 
Soothsayer: No. (Read the form I just handed to you.  It is already indicated on that.)
CBSA: Did you go anywhere else from San Francisco? 
Soothsayer: No.  (Funny question? Do you normally ask people if they went somewhere else?  Just because I am wearing my Vibrams makes you think I am not coming back STRAIGHT from a business trip? Well, my line of work tolerates that!  Also, I am coming back on a 6 hours red-eye flight -- sorry for not looking my sharpest for you at 6am but as a rule of thumb, I don't usually dress up to impress people my taxes pay for.  There is a mugshot of me on the passport showing how I look like when I am dressed.  Oh, and by the way, I did go for a clothing optional personal retreat south of San Francisco, but that information is Not Your Fucking Business (NYFB). Next question?)
CBSA: Where did you stay when you were in San Francisco? 
Soothsayer: The Marriott.  (There are 23 Marriott properties in the San Francisco area but a useless idiotic question like that did not deserve further elaboration in the answer. NYFB.) 
CBSA: *Leafs through the passport pages, fishing for something else to hang on to... Oh you travel a lot to Mexico? 
Soothsayer:  *silence*. (I travel a lot, period, dumbass, period. NYFB.)
CBSA: 2 times this year?!
Soothsayer:  Three. (NYFB)
CBSA: Oh, 3 times this year?!!
Soothsayer:  *silence*.  (Actually in the last 12 months, it is 5 times.  Also visited Australia 2 times this year. How come your eyes didn't perk up on that? What about my trip to Indonesia and Hawaii?  Did that not set off any alarm?  I wonder if you will be able to hold your coffee if I tell you I am visiting Mexico again next month? NYFB)
CBSA: What do you do in Mexico? Do you go for business or pleasure? 
Soothsayer: Vacation. (NYFB)
CBSA: *continues leafing through the passport, starting to feel the awkwardness of my curt responses and sensing that he is running out of my courtesy*... Errm.. Where do you stay when you go to Mexico? 
Soothsayer: *silence*.  I counted to 5 on a special, slow count before giving him the most blank, stupid look I could muster at 7am as I slowly responded,
 "A resort?".  (Seriously?  What is your IQ?  Who hired you for this job?  Where else do you think 99.99% of Canadians traveling to Mexico for a vacation stay?  Your aunt's basement? What was the answer you were looking for?  I would have told you I stay at my drug baron friend's cabana overlooking the ocean? Why are you re-opening the file on that trip anyways? I already answered and satisfied one of your equally retarded colleagues when coming back from THAT trip!  You have asked me 9 questions, only 2 of which are directly relevant to this trip and only 1 of which serves any purpose for the Government of Canada!). 

Finally this ordeal ended silently.  I think CBSA boy sensed that one of us was going to explode either in comical laughter or in frustration.  

Hey CBSA boy, what happened to "Welcome back to Canada", "Welcome back home" or just a simple "Welcome back"? How about showing some courtesy to the business travelers who just went and generated some revenue for Canada, generated their own salary to pay their taxes which in turn pay for your salary to harass them when they come back?  Wow, the ridiculous viciousness of this cycle just blew my mind! 

Oh and by the way, I stay in a cabana overlooking the ocean in Mexico.  And you didn't ask but in case you were interested, when in Indonesia, I stay in a hut in the rice paddies. 

Tweet Follow @TheIdeasOfMarch

TD Bank treats Iranian borns like Japanese Canadians in 1941

TD Canada reminds me of the shameful treatment of Japanese Canadians in 1941 during World War II in its xenophobic treatment of Iranian Canadians. Disturbing news -- TD Canada bank cancelled bank accounts for several Canadian customers whose origin is from Iran.  To me, discriminating against a Canadian citizen merely on the basis of their ethnic origin is a racist and xenophobic measure.  Treating one bonafide Canadian citizen differently from another based on their country of birth is a mockery of the Canadian citizenship ceremony, the oath of allegiance and the Canadian passport.  It serves as a reminder that corporations and the Canadian government can shamelessly revert to treating some citizens as 2nd-class citizens for their own political interests. 


I don't care about what is happening in Iran -- it is immaterial.  The country has not attacked Canada in the last 70 years nor is Canada at war with Iran. But WAIT -- that is EXACTLY the point!  EVEN IF Canada was at war with Iran, discriminating against Canadian citizens based on their origin evokes this country's shameful tarnished legacy of abusing and discriminating against Canadians of Japanese origins 70 years ago during World War II. 


I am not of Iranian origin.  However I strongly believe that the country of birth should not be used as an excuse to discriminate against Canadian citizens.  Whose turn would it be NEXT? "Jamaican-Canadians"? "Israeli-Canadians"? "Ukrainian Canadians"?  "Polish-Canadians"? 


Tell TD Canada Trust on their Twitter and Facebook pages that "T-H-E-Y" ARE just "Canadians". 


I am cancelling my two accounts with TD Canada tomorrow. I encourage everyone to cancel and move their accounts away from TD Canada and send a strong message to the corporation to respect the oath of citizenship. **UPDATE**: Share your story about switching from TD Canada at this website: "Switch in Solidarity".

Please also join the Facebook group: http://www.facebook.com/CondemnTDonIranians. 

Tweet Follow @TheIdeasOfMarch

Harpocracy: Shell wants nuclear power in Canadian tar sands while Germany goes Nuclear free

Another example of how Harpocracy allows the Canadian energy sector to act ridiculously: while post-Fukushima Germany is shutting down nuclear plants to go nuclear-free and leveraging solar energy to consume less non-renewable energy resources, meeting 50% of national demand on a weekend from solar, Shell is suggesting using nuclear power in Canada -- keep reading, it gets better -- to extract tar sands oil.  This coming from Shell with a tarnished track record of massive oil leaks in Nigeria and in the North Sea in UK waters.

Using nuclear power to extract tar sands oil which is already taxing the environment with higher emissions -- can ethical oil get any dirtier?  Is this a breakdown of sensible Economics?  Spending dirty energy to find more dirty energy?  Sounds like a vicious cycle!!

In 50 years, would the world look back at Canada's short-sighted policies scornfully? 

Manulife Financial offers me a future but no e-statements (like 125 years ago)

Manulife has the nerve to offer me a "future" -- while acting like a company born in 1887.    

They do not offer e-statements via email or on their website, at least not for my group RRSP. I would not lose much sleep over this first world problem but it was still very surprising that a Canadian financial institution would not offer electronic statements in 2012!  That they would squander such an easy green-washing opportunity and not even pretend that they care a little bit about not chopping down trees while reducing their costs!  


Out of curiousity, I went to their website's CSR section.  The first paragraph reads: 

Manulife’s approach to corporate social responsibility around the world aligns with our focus on delivering strong, reliable, trustworthy and forward-thinking solutions for our clients and for the communities where we work. 

Forward-thinking solutions? In Manulife-speak, it means smoke flares.

Tweet Follow @TheIdeasOfMarch

WestJet, please don't ask silly, redundant questions!

Bad user interface is usually annoying to me.  It shows a lack of attention to detail and a lack of respect for the audience. 


Consider this example from WestJet's website which asks the same question two different ways when making a reservation.  I wonder what happens if you select "Master" for the title but then select "Female" as the gender.  Would the system accept it?  I did not try it -- was too busy completing my reservation.  That is the point WestJet. Don't ask me silly redundant questions when I am in a rush trying to finalize my reservation!

Tweet Follow @TheIdeasOfMarch

Canadian government to declare First Nations terrorists?

Where is Canada headed? The government will declare the First Nations terrorists, if they resist Big Oil's attempts to put a pipeline through their homeland to export tar faster to China?  Notice the language in this article about how Ottawa has established a counter-terrorism unit to "protect the energy industry":


[Excerpts]

• "...to protect the energy industry from attacks by extremists". 
• "the terrorist threat could come more from people inside the country than outside the border"
• "We are looking at ANY individuals or groups that pose a threat... that is based on either religious, political or ideological goals."
• "...it is important that intelligence is collected against the activities of groups BEFORE they become violent.
• "the key...will be to gather intelligence to prevent attacks".

NUTSHELL:  The Canadian government will protect Big Oil by "looking at" (snooping and collecting intelligence on) ANY individuals or groups who are opposed to key projects (think "Enbridge's Northern Gateway Pipeline") on political or ideological grounds, even BEFORE they have become violent. Oh Canada?!

The review process has already been hijacked so the consultation is already a futile exercise.  The laws of the land are lamely stacked against First Nations so going to the Supreme Court is futile for them.  So if they were to ever consider political or ideological resistance and expressing it in any way (even non-violent ways), they would be fair game for "counter-terrorism" activities treating them as terrorists. 

Canadians should object vehemently to the use of "counter-terrorism" language to deal with internal resistance by any groups on "political or ideological" grounds.  We have seen George Bush and his goons wielding this language south of the border.  We should all stand up and reject the use of this language in Canada, which is clearly aimed at crushing First Nations opposition.  

Stand up now!  Re-post, re-Tweet, share and educate people about this latest tactic from the Harpocracy propped by ethical oil!

Tweet Follow @TheIdeasOfMarch

Go buy something from LUSH to say "Bravo"!

I don't really care for cosmetics (for myself or on others) but I will be buying SOMETHING from Lush this week, just to say "Bravo".  Thank you for speaking up and taking a strong, clear stance against Enbridge's Northern Gateway Pipeline and the ethical oil farce, specially at a time when many others seem to stay spinelessly silent.  (I'm looking at you, BC Premier Christy Clark - at this point ANY opinion you express will be respected more than your nauseating spinelessness). 


Citizenship is about having a voice and getting it heard.  Corporations should not start talking about "corporate citizenship" if they are not willing to take a position, express their views and be vocal -- like good citizens -- instead of hiding behind the lame cover of keeping politics out of business.  Politics and business are joined together at the hip these days so stop pretending -- and start speaking out.  


Two ways we can support LUSH: 

1. Go buy something from LUSH, if not for yourself then a gift for a friend.  Make sure you educate the friend about Enbridge's Northern Gateway Pipeline disaster and encourage all your social networks to do the same. Let's make sure that other corporations take note that speaking out on a political issue did not hurt LUSH and in fact was "good business" for them as well. Give them a noticeable bump in their revenue!
2. Ask other corporate citizens to follow the LUSH example, and earn brownie points with their fans by demonstrating responsible corporate citizenship.  Names that come immediately to mind: Mountain Equipment Co-op (MEC), The Big Carrot, Moksha Yoga, LuluLemon, Bixi Bikes.

Add your suggestions for corporations who should speak up in the comments below.  Speak up, speak out! 

Tweet Follow @TheIdeasOfMarch

Can Ride Clean reduce more emissions than Drive Clean in Ontario?

"97% of all cars clear emissions testing", said the man behind the Canadian Tyre counter, shaking his head wistfully.  "It is a waste of money and time.  The ones who fail are the ones who cannot even afford to get the repairs done.  Single moms, elderly, you know..."


This was at a recent emissions test for my car, as required by the Drive Clean Ontario initiative.  It highlighted the apparent futility of the exercise, making me wonder how many cars got tested every year and at $35 per test, what was the total bill?  The Program Statistics section on Drive Clean's website is "broken" but "Wonderful Wikipedia provided an estimate of $435 million fees collected as the last verifiable figure from 8 years ago.

10 bicycles replacing one polluting car

As a reluctant motorist, who is happier on a bicycle, I'd happily pay a $35 tax if it is invested in protected bike lanes on the streets of smoggy Toronto. A fraction of $435 million would go a long way towards that!   That way I don't have to drive a car.  Who needs Drive Clean when you can Ride Clean? 

Wouldn't that have a more substantial impact on reducing emissions than testing cars that keep passing?  Let's get some cars off the streets!  While we are at it, why not subsidize parking spots and infrastructure for emissions-reducing businesses like Bixi bike-sharing and car-sharing programs like AutoShare and Zip Cars? 


By the way, I love Bixi!

Tweet Follow @TheIdeasOfMarch

Canadian oil field looks way nicer than Azerbaijan's oil field

Looking at Edward Burtynsky's new photographs here, I feel proud that Fort McMUrray, Alberta has the cleanest and neatest looking oil fields, when compared to Belridge, California and Baku, Azerbaijan!  See for yourself below: Fort McMurray does not have the ugly poles sticking out all over the landscape like Azerbaijan. 

Canadians should be more protective of the superior aesthetics of their oil fields.  As Kathryn Marshall wrote, "foreign billionaires don't care".  Given the new analysis that more than 67% of Canada's oil sands ownership and profits are foreign-based, (as pointed out in my January post) Canadians cannot trust these foreign billionaires to maintain the neat appearance of our oil fields. 

Tweet Follow @TheIdeasOfMarch

More -- and faster -- power for ministers, crackdown on charities? Needed: A Freedom Train!

So the rules are being changed and the federal environmental review process is being shortened to 'speed up' projects delayed by the due diligence obligated by the review.  


The concentration of powers is alarming.  A cursory reading of a news article describing the new budgetary changes evokes the image of a dictator seeking to 'fast-track' discretionary powers and authority while the apathetic public looks the other way.  Some examples: 

• "...the environment minister is given more power to decide which resource developments should be subjected to scrutiny... budget bill gives federal cabinet the final say over oil and gas pipelines... overhauls the Fisheries Act to focus only on major waterways, not every single body of water..."
• "...the minister of environment has greater leeway to give industry players exemptions and extensions of their permits... And it cracks down on charities involved in political activity..."
• "...[Finance Minister Jim Flaherty said] "These are quite important long-term changes... We need to get them done quickly..."

So the government is cracking down on charities and giving more discretionary powers to the cabinet and the ministers -- as fast as possible?  That sounds like the perfect recipe for a healthy democracy, doesn't it?


What is the rush?


Is our government rushing to seize authoritarian, dictatorial powers?  The Canadian democracy might just need the Freedom Train 2012 with the Yinka Dene Alliance ironically showing the democratic way to the children of democracy.  


Welcome them in Toronto on the lawn of Metro Hall, 55 John Street, Toronto on 9th May at 11:45am. 

Tweet Follow @TheIdeasOfMarch

Harpocracy - PM blasts foreign money, welcomes Chinese money in oil sands

How can our PM, in the same breath, denounce foreign money pouring into oil sands while inviting Chinese "investment" in the oil sands? 

How can our PM blast environmentalists as "radicals" but then throw his radical support behind the Northern Gateway pipeline, "vowing" to ensure its completion, while an "independent" review panel is still assessing the environmental impact.  How independent can those bureaucrats feel, when the Primer Minister is a party, aggressively attacking and crushing all opposition to the pipeline?

Yes, crushing all opposition to the pipeline and trampling on First Nations' rights while preaching free speech in China?  I am embarrassed and offended.  Canadians deserve a slightly smarter, less "ethical" government.  

Tweet Follow @TheIdeasOfMarch

Not respecting First Nations while trying to do business with them can't be ethical (or smart)?

The president of the Canadian Chamber of Commerce Perrin Beatty can be excused for being pro-business and seeing everything that comes in the way of doing business as an obstacle that needs to be removed or overcome.  However he is creating an obstacle for Canadian businesses by disrespecting the very First Nations that they want to do business with.  


Note how casually Perrin Beatty dismisses treaty rights that get in the way of doing business: 

“We need to look at environmental issues, we need to look at whether projects are respectful of treaty rights and so on, but we need to make decisions as well. And what we’re finding today is a process that simply bogs down, and opponents of development use process itself to prevent development from taking place, not on the merits of the case but simply on the ability to delay.”  [emphasis added]

What "decisions" are these that are so important and urgent that treaty rights "and so on" cannot even slow them down? 


He goes on to support Stephen Harper's governments initiative to "reform" the natural resource project review process.  Reading between the lines, it is okay to change a review process (that is necessitated by treaty rights) to allow "fast-tracking" decisions favouring Canadian businesses, but it is not okay if the decisions are slowed down or even suspended due to treaty rights considerations?  


This is just one example of the failure on part of Canadian businesses to treat the First Nations at least with the same respect that one business would show to another business during business negotiations.  You cannot acknowledge and dismiss the rights of the other party in the same breath.  


Ironically, the review process that he is so upset about, has not been any more respectful.    Tyler McCreary points out the omission of native words in the transcript of the hearings of the Joint Review Panel addressing the Enbridge Northern Gateway project.  He raises an important question:  If the panel cannot hear (and accurately record) the words of the First Nations speakers, how can they inspire confidence that they heard the message in those words? 


If this was two businesses interested in communicating with each other, efforts would be made to have accurate transcripts of the communications.  If this was two nations communicating with each other, efforts would be made to have accurate translations and transcription.  


The failure to treat the First Nations as a "Nation" (or even a business), a sovereign group whose rights have been recognized by the Crown and upheld by the Supreme Court, is an obstacle hindering communication and business with them (if they want to do any business in the first place).  One would have thought that businesses and governments wanting to do business on the First Nations lands, and with their co-operation, would demonstrate that they are smarter -- and more ethical -- than the "unethical" tyrannical, oppressive regimes that bully their populace.  Isn't this about the pursuit of "ethical oil" after all? 

Tweet Follow @TheIdeasOfMarch

Northern Gateway: Is the flow of foreign money and interest ethical?

Canadians are rightfully upset.  Foreign money and interests should not be dictating how our country mines its natural resources and how it balances the world's need for energy against the priorities of its people and the economic benefits. 


As Kathryn Marshall wrote, "foreign billionaires don't care" about Canadian jobs and our national ambitions.  She rightfully expresses dismay over the fact that "this horde of foreign and foreign backed groups" don't answer to us, "they answer to their rich, foreign paymasters."


I embarked on some research this week to educate myself about who is meddling into our national affairs and extraction of natural resources.  Here are some of my disturbing findings about the foreign groups operating in Alberta and British Columbia. 

• Petro China buys 100% control of Alberta oilsands project for $680 million.  The Chinese oil giant bought out its Canadian partner's 40% share to take over control of the entire project. 

• Saipem SpA, an Italian engineering and construction giant wins $1 billion contract in 2010 for Sunrise Energy oil sands project northeast of Fort McMurray. Saipem SpA is owned partly by a parent company that the Italian government has a 30% stake in.  In 2011, Saipem was awarded a $500 million contract in the Athabasca region of Alberta.

• China National Off-shore Oil Corp (CNOOC) pays $2.1 billion to buy OPTI Canada, a Canadian oil-sands company.  In the words of Globe & Mail, this hands over "another slice of the world's second largest oil reserves to CNOOC". 
• Chicago Bridge & Iron Company (CBI), an American engineering and construction giant wins a $0.75 billion contract in 2012 for the Kearl Oil Sands Expansion Project in Alberta.

• France's Total SA gets $9 billion dollar oil sands project approved, as the energy giant was given the green light by Alberta to continue with the development of the Joslyn Oil Sands project. 

Over the last couple of years, that adds up to giant corporations from France, China, Italy and USA snapping up projects and ownership stakes worth more than 15 billion dollars!  And this is not an exhaustive list.  I just got tired of finding many similar deals and contract awards. 

What I found particularly appalling was in one of the reports, it mentioned the environment minister Joe Oliver saying that a "there remains a two weeks consultation period with local First Nations regarding implementation."  Seriously?  You allow a foreign corporation to proceed with a 9 billion dollars contract allowing only 2 weeks for consulting with the people who own this land, live there and will be affected by this project?

Kathryn Marshall hits the nail on the head when she says that these "foreign billionaires" don't care about Canada and are answerable to their "rich, foreign paymasters".  The question is who does our environment minister answer to?  Why is he (and her for that matter!) not focusing on these billions of dollars of investment by foreign corporations in our country?  Are we to believe that these billions are being invested without any politicians being lobbied and influenced by foreign interests and foreign money?  

Should we not fear the foreign intentions, interventions and influences of French, Italian and Chinese companies (often backed by their governments) a lot more than a bunch of 'radical environmentalists'?  

Tweet Follow @TheIdeasOfMarch

Vision

"Beware the ides of March, Caesar!"  

Soothsayers have warned the mighty before.  The warnings have been ignored before. Power and success creates blind spots leading to arrogant dismissal of good counsel.  

The Caesars

Compliant governments have allowed North American corporations to reap disproportional economic gains, turning them into modern-day Caesars in terms of power and influence.  Can they afford to ignore the soothsayers?  

The Soothsayers

I am not a 'tree-hugging hippie' or 'angry anarchist'.  I am: 

• Academically, an economist; an MBA from a top-ranking business school.  
• Professionally, a part of the Fortune 100 corporate elite. 
• Financially, in the 1% tax bracket that the 99% is unhappy with.  

Since I pay more in annual taxes than a lucrative paycheck, I have a high stake in holding corporations and governments accountable for my contributions and a vested interest in the environmental health as a global citizen. 

The Warnings

When the 1% shares the concerns of the 99%, something is 100% wrong.  Corporations are listening with social media monitoring tools.  It is important to add your voice through social channels as each voice contributes to the overall 'sentiment'. Eventually, the crowd's roar echoes the soothsayer's warning to corporate Caesars:  "Beware the Ideas of March."

The Ideas

Disregard for sustainability and CSR sets most corporate agendas at odds with ecological values.  Due to their lobbying influence, governments fail to act as trustees of their people and the environment.  Governments can only deliver on this duty if they are transparent and held accountable.  This sadly leaves indigenous / aboriginal people as the best custodians of the environment while corporations ignore ecological realities as economic 'externalities'.  Hence, this blog is a space for ideas related to: 

• Open government, transparency and accountability 
• Ecological and economic sustainability 
• Rights of indigenous / aboriginal people 
• Corporate practices and intentions adversely impacting the above 
• New ideas that corporations can learn and benefit from

YOU

Whether you are among the 99% or the 1%, speak up.  Be counted, be heard.  Share your ideas with me.  Share my ideas with others.  Subscribe via social channels below not just to stay in touch but to add your voice to mine, so our collective voices are amplified.

THE GOAL

Who is it in the press that calls on me?

I hear a tongue shriller than all the music!

Speak! Caesar is turn'd to hear...

(Caesar)

Follow @TheIdeasOfMarch