Magic Statistics

Tony Blair has announced that Catholic adoption agencies will not be granted an exemption from new laws requiring them to consider homosexuals as adoptive parents.  The new rules will not become effective until the end of 2008 but, in the meantime, faith-based agencies will be required to refer homosexual applicants to other agencies.

Ruth Gledhill, intrepid religion correspondent for The Times of London, reports Bishop of Durham Tom Wright’s scathing attack on the government for its decision.  While talking to him about another matter, she took the opportunity to ask him his opinion.  Bishop Tom then took the opportunity to unload.

Dr Wright, in his car on his way to address a conference at Swanwick, was furious with the Government. "There is no way that the Catholic Church is going to change its mind on this one given 18 months or so." he said.  "This completely fails to take into account the views and beliefs of all those involved. The idea that New Labour - which has got every second thing wrong and is backtracking on extended drinking hours, is in a mess over this cash-for-peerages business, cannot keep all its prisons under control - the idea that New Labour can come up with a new morality which it forces on the Catholic Church after 2,000 years - I am sorry - this is amazing arrogance on the part of the Government.

"Legislation for a nouveau morality is deeply unwise. That is not how morality works. At a time when the Government is foundering with so many of its policies - and I haven't even mentioned Iraq - the thought that this Government has the moral credibility to be able tell [sic] the Roman Catholic Church how to order one area of its episcopal teaching is frankly laughable. When you think about it like that, it is quite extraordinary. I suppose the hope is that in 18 months time there will be a different Prime Minister who might take a different view, and this will kick it into the long grass until then."

I do hope he’s right about a new PM trashing the regulations but, at this juncture, it’s hard to see any of the prospective candidates doing that.  The entire Labour cabinet, with the sole exception of Ruth Kelly, backs the regs.   As well, David Cameron, the man who will lead the Tories into the next election, has now come out in favour.

Previous related posts:

• Catholic agencies to defy homosexual adoption regulations
• If you think Labour is insufferable now, just wait

Ontario Premier Dalton McGuinty has been waging a combative campaign against the so-called "fiscal imbalance".  According to Mr McGuinty, the amount Ontario taxpayers pony up for equalisation transfers has jumped 30% in the past three years, to $4.9 billion in the 2006-07 fiscal year—over 40% of the program's total disbursements.  Also, Ontario's Intergovernmental Affairs Minister Marie Bountrogianni recently mentioned that Ontario's contribution is about equal to Quebec's equalisation revenue, yet Quebec maintains lower charges for university tuition and a heavily subsidised universal daycare program.

That was too much for Ms Bountrogianni's Quebec counterpart, who has warned Ontario to put a lid on it or else Canada's "political stability" may be jeopardised.

The Ontario government, which has launched an aggressive Internet ad campaign pushing for a fair deal on reforming the country's equalization program, needs to be reminded of its responsibilities toward Canadian unity, Quebec's Intergovernmental Affairs Minister said.

Benoit Pelletier said in an interview with CanWest News Service that the McGuinty government needs to recall the economic benefits Ontario, as the country's financial engine, gains from achieving political stability in the country.

"The fact is [Ontario's government] has a responsibility in regards to their other partners and that responsibility is, I would say, mainly represented by the principle of equalization," said Mr. Pelletier, who quickly added he supports Ontario's "legitimate" campaign on boosting transfer payments to the province.

Let's bury the hatchet and gang up on Ottawa for a bigger cut of federal tax revenues.  There's something we can all agree on.

Mr Pelletier spins keeping Quebec on the dole as sound statecraft.

"Every province is reacting strongly on this issue because of everything that is involved — all the money that is at issue … every province is defending its point of view very strongly and it is normal, but at some point we will have to come to something that is good for Canada and not only looking to our own self-interest."

Giving Quebec billions in welfare equalisation payments is "good for Canada" but suggesting that Quebec get its hand out of Ontario's pocket is "looking to our own self-interest"—not to mention putting our political stability at risk.  Truly an unbiased and dispassionate perspective on national unity.

h/t: National News Watch

Previous related posts:

• Bouchard to lazy Quebecers: Get back to work so you can pay your taxes
• Ontario’s sluggish economy will slow Canada down: RBC
• Quebec's feeble economy is its own fault

The Saskatchewan government has rolled out a new advertising promotion to make the province appear even more exciting than it already is.  The campaign centres around a new logo, showing the province's name followed by an exclamation point.

The plan is to use the "wordmark" on advertising, highway signs and other displays, the documents said, to get the message across that "Saskatchewan is the best place in Canada for young people to live, work and raise a family."

The province is warning employees, however, that the exciting new logo is not appropriate for all government releases.

[A]ccording to a 29-page book of guidelines being circulated to government departments, the logo is for "optimistic" messages and not for announcements concerning coroners' inquests, forest fires or West Nile virus outbreaks.

But those sound so exciting.

The campaign also features a new website, topped by a spiffy picture, the exciting new logo, and these inspirational words.

Why Saskatchewan?

The question is no longer why Saskatchewan: it's why aren't you here?

Well, sorry, but based on Saskatchewan's population statistics, the question is not "Why aren't you here?"; it's "Why are you still here?"

According to Statistics Canada's latest demographic estimates, the province's population totalled 985,859 on 1 October 2006, compared to 1,000,134 on 1 July 2001 (see page 31 of this pdf document), a loss of 14,275 in just over five years.

Far more people leave Saskatchewan for another province or territory than move in from elsewhere in Canada.  Between July 2001 and October 2006, the province saw a net loss of 37,852 residents due to inter-provincial migration, more than offsetting natural increase (surplus of births over deaths) of 15,750 and a net gain of 7827 international migrants.  (See page 45 of the same pdf document.)  Apparently, people that already live in Saskatchewan don’t find it exciting enough to stay there.

Be that as it may, if the brains trust at the Government of Saskatchewan can turn that around by tacking an exclamation point on to the province's name, more power to ‘em.

h/t: Diocese of Saskatchewan, which is pondering a name change to either "Diocese of Saskatchewan!" or "Diocese! of Saskatchewan".

Sources:

Statistics Canada, 2006. "Canada's population". The Daily, 21 December.  Statistics Canada catalogue no. 11-001-XIE. http://www.statcan.ca/Daily/English/061221/d061221d.htm (accessed 21 December 2006).

Statistics Canada, 2006.  Quarterly Demographic Estimates, July-September 2006, preliminary.  Statistics Canada catalogue no. 91-002-XIE.  http://www.statcan.ca/english/freepub/91-002-XIE/91-002-XIE2006003.pdf  (accessed 29 January 2007).

Previous related post: Saskatchewan loses Grey Cup