There is no doubt the Conference Board has summarily dismissed St. John's and in fact this Province when it comes to new policy for Canadian Cities. If we take the report as a document the feds will listen to (and they will) - we have to be worried.
We could be looking at policy for transportation infrastructure - federal jobs and crown agencies - municipal infrastructure - educational institutes - and federal funding - being focused even more on Halifax.
Halifax is what the Conference Board calls one of the HUB cities.
Please Read below for a section of the Report
Policy Implications: Defining the Focus
In highlighting the distinctive needs of Canada’s big cities and the unique economic contribution of Canada’s hub cities identified through our convergence research, this volume makes a strong case for prioritizing this combined group of cities—which we identify as major cities (Halifax, Montréal, Ottawa–Gatineau, Toronto, Winnipeg, Regina, Saskatoon, Calgary, Edmonton and Vancouver)—for national strategic investment and focus. Smaller cities and towns, and indeed the country as a whole, will thrive fully when their growth is fuelled by that of the country’s major cities. Helping Canada’s major cities reach their potential is therefore a win-win proposition for all citizens. A wider endorsement of this view by citizens and leaders alike will open the way for a more strategic approach to investment in Canada’s major cities.
You will also note that all provinces have a "major city" except the Atlantic Region which has been restricted to Nova Scotia and Halifax...and then there's this little tidbit for Canada's "Major Cities".
Canada’s major cities are critical to our national prosperity, yet they face significant challenges that limit their potential.Our major cities bear the costs of a growing urban population and expanding economy, but lack the fiscal capacity to meet their needs or to maximize their potential. Booming populations and sprawling development create congestion, environmental and health challenges unique to cities.
The challenges of managing growth are exacerbated by the deteriorating state of Canada’s urban infrastructure. Estimates of the national infrastructure gap ranged, in 2003, from $50 billion to $125 billion, with municipalities owning the largest stake in this gap. Canada’s present systems of municipal governance fail to provide cities with the organizational structures and decision-making capacity necessary for strategic planning and regional coordination.
The decisions that cities and provinces make about development patterns,
transportation, utilities standards, building codes and industrial planning will have profound environmental impacts. Canada’s major city-regions are competing for investment and jobs against other major city-regions around the world. Unless
governments and their civic partners support the kind of initiatives that are boosting the international rankings of competitor cities, prospects of improving the
record of Canadian cities are not good.
You know - I am just a little sick of our province being crucified by Canadian Institutions - and now the Conference Board weighs in on this ridiculous concept.
I hope there will be some response to this before Newfoundland and Labrador becomes a virtual appendage to Atlantica under the stewardship of Halifax.
Please see a copy of the Report HERE
It is interesting to note how this report came to be:
The Canada Project had its genesis in 2002 at The Conference Board of Canada’s annual Canadian Conference—a meeting of senior public and private sector leaders at which participants are invited to share their most pressing concerns about
Canada’s present challenges and future prospects.
Many of the leaders at this meeting raised the same underlying issue: that Canada was floundering in a state of public policy drift at a time that called out for national strategic action in the face of rising global competition.
And thus, The Canada Project was born.
Now, almost four years later—thanks to the $2.4 million invested by business and government organizations, the $1.0 million contributed by the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada and the effort and expertise invested by some of Canada’s top researchers and professionals—we present this four-volume compendium of the results of our work.
Here are the list of sponsors for the Project:
Note the Lead Investor was CIBC
Academic Research Funding Partner: Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
Accenture Inc.
Alberta Ministry of Municipal Affairs
ATB Financial
Banque Nationale du Canada
BCE Inc.
Bombardier Transportation
British Columbia Ministry of Community Services
Business Development Bank of Canada
Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce
Canam Group Inc.
CGI Group Inc.
Deloitte & Touche LLP
DuPont Canada
EnCana Corporation
Ernst & Young LLP
Forest Products Association of Canada
General Electric Canada Inc.
George Weston Limited
Harris Steel Group Inc.
IBM Canada Ltd.
Imperial Oil Limited
Lafarge Canada Inc.
Manulife Financial Corporation
Mercer Delta Consulting Limited
Microsoft Canada Co.
Ontario Ministry of Economic Development and Trade
Ontario Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing
Power Corporation of Canada
Pratt & Whitney Canada Corp.
PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP
RBC Financial Group
SaskEnergy Incorporated
SNC-Lavalin Group Inc.
Social Sciences and Humanities .
Research Council of Canada
Sun Life Financial Inc.
Syncrude Canada Ltd.
TD Bank Financial Group
TELUS Corporation
The Bank of Nova Scotia
The Co-operators Group Limited
Toronto Hydro Corporation
TransAlta Corporation
UBS Securities Canada Inc.
Unilever Canada Inc.
Xerox Canada Ltd.
It is time to move on this!
32 comments:
Once again you take an issue and apply your prejudices and assumptions to come up with yet another anti-Ottawa/poor Newfoundland the victim tirade.
You didn't read the report at all. That's clear from your comments here and on radio this morning. You are just going off half cocked at the entire thing.
This is a study not federal policy.
St. John's wasn't dismissed. It is identified as a major city but it doesn't fit the criteria the study group used to find centres of growth they think should get extra government investment.
St. John's isn't alone. There are 17 cities just like - all are important. They just don't make it on the list for this particular study.
"Robert"?? you are ignorant - I have read the study.
I did not say it was federal policy - in fact I carefully described what the report was and how it came to be.
St. John's should be included as a major (hub) city - anything else is not acceptable.
It will be utilized by the feds and public officials have been involved in the preparation.
It is an important issue for us to deal with.
You are arguing for the sake of arguing with me - that says something.
Quote: "We could be looking at policy for transportation infrastructure - federal jobs and crown agencies - municipal infrastructure - educational institutes - and federal funding - being focused even more on Halifax."
I see. If it isn't economically viable for companies to locate somewhere, usually because markets or compelling capabilities are not nearby, you want taxpayers to create artificial environments, just to employ you. There's no alternative such as YOU moving to where jobs are? Or creating environment for self-sustaining (rather than public teat) jobs?
Just great. EI plus artificial infrastructure. Plus a wharf in every backyard. Does anyone there not have the "it's so nice to keep living off the taxpayers" mentality? Am I missing something?
There's another artificial city called Brazilia in the middle of the jungle in Brazil, created to be the "new capital". Failed, of course. Wide streets, no bodies. A slightly-more successful equivalent in Belize, the whole country of which is a hell-hole anyway ... whetever they put their city (equivalent to a medium-sized town here).
But, strangely, no one wants to go and live there. They'd rather go to where the jobs are. Or emigrate to another country where opportunities are boundless and limited only by their initiative and hard work. Strange, eh, these people with gumption? And then we have some Canadians ...
Kitchener-Waterloo area had one semi-university, Waterloo Lutheran. It pushed hard with business and government to create one centre of academic excellence ... Univ of Waterloo. It specialized in engineering, math, brainy stuff, etc. Not "the arts", bed-changing. Very high hurdles for entry and passing ... I know, I got in but flunked out.
Businesses like NCR, IBM, Univac (in those days) started establishing research units nearby, soaking up the smarts and the students when they graduated. Then proto plants. Well, the rest is history. With excellence came research, came support, came community and dynamics and hospital and other research facilities, came other industry, etc. the "Cambridge" area, which encapsulates all this, is probably 3/4 of a million, thriving, all on its own. Growth in the area created nearby communities, people, educated labour pools, Honda and CAME plants, parts manufacturers.
As far as I know, the only major PROVINCIAL investment was in the original university. 100 km from Toronto, nowhere near the Big Three auto giants. Markets and centres of excellence created, not soaked up.
I assume you have a few universities down east? Any bright ideas? Other than creating public infrastucture with taxpayer money to provide thinly-disguised make-work jobs? EI disguised.
Change the mentality, folks. Or you will always find yourselves complaining. And elect some smart people, not just the ones that will pave your road this election. Or employ your uncle until the government changes.
I'm not complaining, lest you think that. I will about funding "make work/EI" jobs. But I want everyone to have meaningful jobs, a great life and environment to bring up kids in a self-sustaining world. Opportunities for education, growth, business creation if that's your thing. Anything than continue this cycle of wanting to live off the public purse forever, and having to fake it with non-easterners.
If you don't want meaningful private industry jobs, fine. It's not eveyone's cake. But it's your choice, so please don't ask those who work hard to earn a buck to support your choice in lifestyle.
Let me know your ACTION plan, not your wail and moan plan. I still have some contacts in business and finance, my old boss and business partner was EVP in quite a few very large companies and Vice-Chair of a bank, is an NSer along with his wife,and I'm sure we can rustle up some other smart folks if need be.
But we are going to do nada for you if all you want to do is nada.
Where else do you get an offer like that?
Sue: Quote: "St. John's should be included as a major (hub) city - anything else is not acceptable. "
That's not the mindset that is required. If that's the starting point, then the end point is keep going to the EI office. Facts in a strategy may lead to validating your statement, but you don't open with that.
Well, you do, but no one is interested in the subject any more, because it's just a replay of "competing for taxpayer money". And that is not a winning strategy. If it is for you, then everyone should just admit it, rather than trying to fake the "real development" angle.
"we could be"
could - could - could
Ottawa exists because?
You have had the federal government at your doorstep for too long - that is a propped up economy.
I do appreciate your comments - as it demonstrates the mindset toward our province.
You can not hide the prejudice - it is obvious. I only hope your friends will join in.
As for EI - you are kidding right?
Oh you mean the program for the auto giants? Oh that one! Any changes to that program have been challenged the most by Ontario.
"There's another artificial city called Brazilia in the middle of the jungle in Brazil, created to be the "new capital". Failed, of course. Wide streets, no bodies. A slightly-more successful equivalent in Belize, the whole country of which is a hell-hole anyway ... whetever they put their city (equivalent to a medium-sized town here).
But, strangely, no one wants to go and live there. They'd rather go to where the jobs are. Or emigrate to another country where opportunities are boundless and limited only by their initiative and hard work. Strange, eh, these people with gumption? And then we have some Canadians ..."
Your welcome for the contribution Newfoundland and Labrador made during past wars and military objectives now.
You my friend should check your misplaced arrogance at the door.
Eric Sorensen Said:
"I see. If it isn't economically viable for companies to locate somewhere, usually because markets or compelling capabilities are not nearby, you want taxpayers to create artificial environments, just to employ you. There's no alternative such as YOU moving to where jobs are? Or creating environment for self-sustaining (rather than public teat) jobs"?
No Erik if Newfoundland and Labrador's resources had been used in the first place to have created economies right here in Newfoundland and Labrador, instead of Nova Scotia, Quebec, Ontario and Manitoba, there would be no need to create an artificial environment here, since the need would be physically here. But that is the past and from now on Newfoundland and Labrador's resources must be used specifically for this province.
But you Erik you do want to create anything in Newfoundland and Labrador. You want Newfoundland and Labrador's resources exported to Mainland Canada, not only do you wish our natural resources be exported, you also want this province's human resources as well.
Eric are you being paid by the Federal Government to be provocative towards Newfoundland and Labrador or are you paid by some Think Tank to meddle in our affairs? I think we have the right to have that question answered, especially if you are paid by our Federal Tax Dollars.
Sue and others: Read my first post again, carefully, particularly towards the end. If you do another post like your last one, we will all know what the game is, won't we?
Your choice.
I would like to know the dollar figure paid for immigrants to be located in the province of Ontario. It would be an astronomical figure indeed. That is just one sector of the hundreds of sectors that Ontario has been the beneficiary of , compliments of the Federal Government.
I would like to get my hands on all the records of Federal monies that have gone into Ontario to have built it into the Manufacturing Machine that it has become. And, oh yes, I would love to have an accounting of the resources from Newfoundland and Labrador that have assisted in the building of that manufacturing machine, with little profit to Newfoundland and Labrador.
According to the study criteria St. John's is not a major hub city.
Would you like us to declare St. john's a major tropical city located in Asia too?
The study will not be used by the feds for anything. It will not be influential on the feds for anything.
As for ignorant, you might consider flinging around insults that aren't accurate befoire you whine about anything danny said about you.
Erik: get used to the nonsense. Some people will try and put words in your mouth since they can't deal with your facts.
Then your will find your comments being censored. It's bound to happen.
Robert - I meant to ask - what did you think of Air Canada's elimination of direct flights to England?
I think it is pretty clear who those two blokes are working for. They need not put another word in print, I have them figured out completely.
Oh the the dollars that get wasted by governments to destroy another province's change of making it in Canada. It is incredible.
OK, folks, so now we know what the game is.
Keep sending taxpayer money. Continued and embraced EI. A firm focus on the past. No interest in improving the lives of your children.
Sue, if a CA, should know better. Or else it stands for "can't add" down there. Pandering, that's all it is. Looking to be President of the new republic of EastCoastistan, Sue? Your blog is a living testament to the attitude you nurture.
And, no, neither I or my ex-boss have ever been employed by any government. We are both retired and have some time on our hands to FREELY devote to worthy causes. Obviously, your crowd (through disinterest and rejection) doesn't qualify. Certainly not to frauds.
I must say a good look at the companies list is a real education. Sure!
And as for making St. John's a tropical city in Asia. The tropics might not be too far away if your smell and such of success keeps being emitted.
I admire the way Ottawa dealt with immigration for British Columbia back in the 1990s, just a few years before the 100 year British lease ran out on the Honk Kong territory in 1999 after which Honk Kong was to be reverted back China. Ottawa arranged a number of Prime Minister's Trade Missions to Hong Kong prior to Hong Kong being handed over to China to capture some of the capital that would be on the move. Those trade missions cost the Canadian tax payers hundreds of million of dollar that saw billions of dollars worth of assets brought to Canada, particulary British Columbia. Ottawa knew that there would be billions of dollars in Honk Kong looking to find a safe haven and it acted on that. That was a great move and British Columbia was one of the biggest benefactors. What a strategic move by Ottawa.
I can site many instances like this one, but it certainly was a strategic and positive way for Ottawa to have spent the Canadian Taxpayes dollars. That is how Ottawa should spend all of its dollars, it should do it strategically.
But Robert, it's the Conference Board of Canada. CANADA!
Where's the salary coming from WJM?
You were in when I called.
You have had the federal government at your doorstep for too long - that is a propped up economy.
Then what is the economy of NL?
In your answer, you may wish to make mention of the following facts:
* A larger percentage of the NL population (1.4%) are federal civil servants than of the Ontario population (1.2%).
* NL has a larger per-capita federal civil service presence than all but three provinces.
* A larger percentage of the NL population are PROVINCIAL civil servants than is the case in Ontario (2.0% vs. 0.8%)
* A larger percentage of the NL population works in the "MUSH sector" (i.e., the public sector exclusive of direct civil service jobs: schools, hospitals, municipalities, universities, etc.) than of the Ontario population: 7.6% vs. 6.5%.
* In 1981, NL had the leanest non-federal public sector of the 10 provinces. It has since grown to be the fourth or third biggest, adjusted for population.
Sue, is this "propping up" as well?
Why or why not?
Is it sustainable in the long run?
No Erik if Newfoundland and Labrador's resources had been used in the first place
"had been used".
Again with the passive mood.
What is stopping whom from using those resources to "create economies", whatever that means?
to have created economies right here in Newfoundland and Labrador, instead of Nova Scotia, Quebec, Ontario and Manitoba,
Question: Is it morally culpable for Newfoundlanders to use Labrador resources to "create economies" in Newfoundland, instead of Labrador? Why or why not?
I would like to know the dollar figure paid for immigrants to be located in the province of Ontario. It would be an astronomical figure indeed. That is just one sector of the hundreds of sectors that Ontario has been the beneficiary of , compliments of the Federal Government.
How is it "compliments of the federal government"?
Most of the public money that ends up being used towards immigrant settlement is provincial, not federal.
I love you too Sue. Hanging up the phone is harassment, though.
As I mentioned on another comment - I was holding and something came up. The truth!
Don't be shy - when you work in a federal office - say it!
Why did you delete your own comment, Sue?
which comment?
erik... wish you would have seen your shadow a couple of weeks ago and crawled back into your hole.
You talk about taxpayers creating artificial environments to benefit us here in NL.
Taken directly from the Ontario Government's website. " Ontario is the economic engine that powers the Canadian Economy. This Province contributes about 40 percent of Canada's total employment. Ontario has relatively high employment in manufacturing and financial and business services, and relatively less employment in agriculture and mining."
Hmmmm.. artificial environment. The higher levels of employment in Newfoundland Labrador are seen in mining, agriculture, forestry, oil and gas, fishing, and acquaculture. We have lower levels in the manufacturing, financial and business services. Gee, i wonder which would be considered more artificial????
Without the benefit of the Federal Government, both directly and indirectly, i wonder if Ontario would be the economic engine that powers the Canadian Economy. What? with a few thousand miners and farmers?
Hello, "Disgusted". If you have such great and revenue-producing assets like minerals and hydro, then use them to create manufacturing, financial, service sector, etc. jobs in NL&L. Go ahead. NO ONE IS STOPPING YOU!
Don't sell hydro to anyone else, use it for your own business purposes. Keep your minerals. Use them yourself.
Sell your products, consisting I suppose of finished goods, financial services, services (e.g., consulting, technology, etc) into their markets.
Why don't you do this, "Disgusted"? No one is stopping you. Could it be that the markets for manufactured goods are large distances away, rendering the selling price uncompetitive? Could it be that you really don't have that large labour pool that actually wants to work for a living? Could it be that your labour costs and productivity would be uncompetitive?
These are the reasons, "Disgusted", that you don't have manufacturing, services, financial sector jobs like Ontario, or BC, or Alberta ... because they are next door to their markets, and are price-competitive. When they aren't, big business shifts production elsewhere.
That's why northern Ontario pulp, paper, mining is going through a crisis. Not that there isn't any of it there. But that business chases and relocates to lower cost areas. It's why Hershey's Canadian plant in Smith Falls, ON is closing down in 45 days. Production is moving to Mexico. If auto production becomes uncompetitive in Ontario, it will shift out of there faster than you can say Kazaam.
All this is very simple to understand. Business refuses to subsidize inefficiences and just moves production to new efficient locales. One other thing: Toronto got to be the financial capital because of Separation ... the Federal government contributed NOT ONE CENT to that process. Why? Companies moved wholesale out of Quebec after the first PQ government was elected. Pronto. The banks moved the fastest, and first. Insurance companies weren't far behind. Again, not one cent of federal money.
Business loves efficiencies, hates uncertainty, and absolutely abhors risk (PQ nationalizing businesses ... they did it for the Hydro company, and that scared the rest of business).
THOSE are the facts of life. It is not the federal government, it is not those nasty Ontarians torturing Newfs, it is the way the world works. No bull.
So you have the same choice I pointed out above in my comments. Either DO something about it, or stop complaining. Because in the absense of action, complaining will do diddly-squat and only pee off anyone (like me) who might (did) offer to help you, for free, no strings attached.
Think about it. Sue knows this, but she consciously and venally prefers to lead the rag-tag band of wailing disidents. It's so much easier for her to do this than actually do something. Besides, she might end up Queen of Newfistan. That and $1.25 will get you a coffee at Tim's. Another product of the nanny state, something for nothing, I'm entitled to more of your money, I don't want to work, I take no responsibility for the direction and consequences of my life, keep the pogey coming, crowd.
And, if you want final proof of what I'm saying, look above and see if you find ONE commenter who looks forward rather than complaining about the past, and threatening to withhold hydro or whatnot from Ontario. Just one, either in this set of post threads or the other thread that complained about my web site beating up on poor little NL&Lers. The one where I made the offer. Twice.
I rest my case. Folks, at least on this blog, are deadbeats and don't want to solve their problem. They just want to complain about it endlessly.
You seem to have fallen for the premise that the Conference Board of Canada is important and influential.
This is just another trendy issue for the Board to milk for some free publicity. The Board is a non-profit and very minor 'think-tank' based in Ottawa.
Without the benefit of the Federal Government, both directly and indirectly, i wonder if Ontario would be the economic engine that powers the Canadian Economy. What? with a few thousand miners and farmers?
Take away all the federal civil servants in Ontario - 150,000 or so.
Use a really generous multiplier, say, 10.
That removes 1.5-million jobs from Ontario. And it's still the largest provincial economy.
Bzztt. Try again.
WJM you said: "Most of the public money that ends up being used towards immigrant settlement is provincial, not federal".
WJM you have a short memory if you cannot remember the hundreds of millions spent on the Prime Minister's Trade Missions to Hong Kong back in the mid to late 1990s to Hong Kong that resulted in thousands of immigrants moving to British Columbia.
I can remember reading an article in McClain’s Magazine on those trips. The article was very revealing.
The Federal Government knew that there would be billions of dollars of capital on the move when Hong Kong reverted back to China after the 99 years British lease expired on that territory in 1999. Canada knew that money would be looking for a safe haven, so it capitalized with Canadian tax payers' dollars to bring immigrants and their capital to Canada.
You say most of the money spent is by the provincial governments. Isn't Immigration Canada a Federal expense? Also how about the hundreds of millions spent and still ongoing in trying to expel some of those immigrants Canada accepted and let stay here for up to 10 years, and then for some reason or other wanted these people out of the country. The hundreds of millions of dollars that have been used for legal representation for those people, isn't that taxpayer’s money coming out of the Federal coffers?
How about the millions and millions of dollars spent on the downing of an Air India Airliner, wasn't that Canadian tax payers money?
WJM you have a short memory if you cannot remember the hundreds of millions spent on the Prime Minister's Trade Missions to Hong Kong back in the mid to late 1990s to Hong Kong that resulted in thousands of immigrants moving to British Columbia.
Hundreds of millions on a "trade mission"?
Really?
REALLY?
What's your source for that figure?
You say most of the money spent is by the provincial governments. Isn't Immigration Canada a Federal expense?
Yip. But most of the money spent settling immigrants is spent by the social services, education, and health care systems of the provinces.
How about the millions and millions of dollars spent on the downing of an Air India Airliner, wasn't that Canadian tax payers money?
What does that have to do with immigration?
WJM - The tens of millions and upwards to 100 million that got spent by the Federal Government for the legal system to carry out the trials were spent in the province of British Columbia and as a result was a great infusion of cash into that economy. It was as a result of immigrants who had immigrated to that province who brought along their prejudices with them to Canada. If I am wrong on that one I am truly sorry.
The tens of millions and upwards to 100 million that got spent by the Federal Government for the legal system to carry out the trials
What "trials"?
WJM you asked: "What "trials"?
WJM According to the CBC story posted below the investigation and prosecution of the accused have been the costliest in Canadian history, estimated at about $130 million.
WJM - I have a question for you. I believe you ask questions for the sake of just asking question. Do you? I cannot believe you appear to be so UNAWARE in some of your questioning.
AIR INDIA TRIAL VERDICT: NOT GUILTY
March 16, 2005: Read British Columbia Supreme Court Justice Ian Bruce Josephson's Judgment in Finding Ripudaman Singh Malik & Ajaib Singh Bagri Not Guilty: Click Here
Like I say WJM there were upwards of $100 million spent on this sad and evil incident. Do
(AP Photo/Jane Wolsak)
IN DEPTH: AIR INDIA
The Bombing of Air India Flight 182
CBC News Online | September 25, 2006
THE AIR INDIA TRIAL
The Verdicts
Complete text of the judgement
On March 16, 2005, a B.C. Supreme Court judge acquitted Ripudaman Singh Malik and Ajaib Singh Bagri on eight charges related to the bombing of Air India Flight 182 on June 22, 1985. It was Canada's worst mass murder - 329 people were killed. Two baggage handlers at Tokyo's Narita Airport died in another connected bombing.
The investigation and prosecution of the accused have been the costliest in Canadian history, estimated at about $130 million.
An inquiry into the bombing of Air India 182 — how it occurred, why the law has failed to find those responsible and whether in could happen again — began on June 21, 2006. The first three hearings were held on July 18, 19 and 20. The inquiry began hearing evidence on Sept. 25, starting with the relatives of some victims.
It all started more than 20 years ago.
Ajaib Singh Bagri [left] (CP Photo/Chuck Stoody) and Ripudaman Singh Malik (CP Photo/Richard Lam)
June 22, 1985. Airline agent Jeanne Bakermans checks in two pieces of luggage at Vancouver International Airport that will change the course of history.
Hours later, the first suitcase explodes inside the baggage terminal at Tokyo's Narita Airport while being transferred to an Air India flight. Two baggage handlers are killed. Exactly 55 minutes later, the other bag, a dark-brown hard-sided Samsonite suitcase, explodes in the forward cargo hold of Air India Flight 182 as it approaches the coast of Ireland.
Some passengers actually survive the 747's fall from 31,000 feet only to drown in the frigid waters of the Atlantic.
The attack kills 329 people, including 82 children. Among the victims are 280 Canadian citizens, mostly born in India or of Indian descent.
Anant Anantaraman lost his wife and two daughters in the Air India tragedy. Both his little girls, he says, were very talented violinists. For years after the crash Anant found it impossible to listen to music. Each June he marks the anniversary of their death ... and each June he hopes the nation will remember this was not a foreign tragedy ... most of the victims were Canadians.
"I want the public to remember these people," Anantaraman told CBC News.
"I would like to see Canadians understand that this is not a local tragedy, it's not a tragedy that happened to me and a few people. I want them to understand it's a national tragedy, which has never been sort of resolved."
Mourners gather on the coast of Ireland to pay their respects to Air India victims.
Anant gave up on the promises of Canadian police to bring those responsible to justice. In 1998, he said, the RCMP told him that charges were imminent.
Nothing happened publicly in the two years after that. But the investigation picked up steam behind the scenes. Crown prosecutors were brought on board to begin reviewing the 15 years worth of evidence gathered by police. Soon a team of 14 prosecutors and 20 police officers was at work on the case full time.
As the investigation headed into the home stretch, police left nothing to chance. They refused to publicly discuss either their theory or possible suspects in the case. Their caution could have stemmed from the fact there was a widespread belief that the investigation – the longest, most complicated and expensive in Canadian history – had been botched from the very beginning.
That's because Canadian authorities were on to the suspects in this case long before the crime was ever committed.
Sikh militants tailed
In early 1985, Rajiv Gandhi – prime minister of India at the time – was getting ready to visit North America. India asked Canada and the United States to keep close tabs on Sikh militants who might pose a security threat. Many Sikhs around the world were furious over the Indian government's 1984 assault on the Golden Temple at Amritsar, Sikhism's holiest shrine. Brian Mulroney – Canada's prime minister at the time – agreed to India's request.
Talwinder Singh Parmar
Security officials placed a British Columbia man named Talwinder Singh Parmar under around-the-clock surveillance. Parmar was the leader of the militant Babbar Khalsa sect, a group committed to the violent establishment of Khalistan, an independent Sikh homeland, in the Indian state of Punjab. Agents followed Parmar's every move and tapped his phones.
Three weeks before the Air India bombing, agents followed Parmar and another man, Inderjit Singh Reyat, into the woods on Vancouver Island. There was a loud bang. But the agents thought little of it. Later, most of Parmar's taped telephone conversations were erased before anyone ever listened to them.
Two days before the bombings, police say a man of East Indian descent went to the Canadian Pacific Airlines ticket office in downtown Vancouver. He paid cash for two tickets. Both were registered under the last name "Singh." One ticket was booked to go to Narita Airport in Tokyo and then on to India. The other ticket was booked from Vancouver to connect with Air India Flight 182 out of Toronto.
Police believe that man was working with Parmar and a group of others. But in one of the biggest gaffes of the case, there was no surveillance on Parmar the day police believe the bombs were delivered to Vancouver airport.
In the aftermath of the bombings, the pressure was on to lay charges fast.
Within a few months, RCMP officers raided the homes of a half-dozen prominent Sikhs in British Columbia. Charges were laid against two men: Talwinder Singh Parmar and Inderjit Singh Reyat, the mechanic Parmar had visited on Vancouver Island. They were charged with minor weapons offences, but the police left no doubt as to why these suspects were being charged. They told a news conference that the raids and arrests were made as part of the investigation into the Narita Airport blast and the downing of Air India Flight 182.
The police, however, had acted prematurely. The charges against Parmar were dropped. Reyat was fined $2,000 and released. In exchange for that little piece of justice, the police had shown their hand to their key suspects in the case.
Reyat refuses to co-operate
For the next 15 years, the Air India investigation languished. The most police were able to manage was the 1991 conviction of Inderjit Singh Reyat in the Narita bombing case. Police presented evidence linking components of the bomb remains found in Tokyo with items Reyat had purchased in the preceding weeks. Among them, a Sanyo stereo tuner that police believe housed the Narita bomb.
Inderjit Singh Reyat
Reyat served 10 years for manslaughter in the deaths of the two baggage handlers at the Tokyo airport. He insisted he was innocent.
"I never deny buying some items," Reyat told CBC News. "I bought the tuner, right, and gave it to someone else. I don't know what happened after that. But I did not make the bomb, or know of anybody who asked me to make a bomb."
Reyat himself was able to provide one of the most interesting glimpses inside the police investigation: police had always hoped to lay conspiracy charges against everyone involved in the Air India bombing. The best way to do that is with the co-operation of one of the conspirators.
Reyat said he was offered $1 million for his testimony. That's the amount of the reward police have offered for information leading to convictions in the case.
In October 2000, charges were laid against Sikh cleric Ajaib Singh Bagri and millionaire businessman Ripudaman Singh Malik. Bagri, from Kamloops, B.C., and Malik, from Vancouver, were charged with murder, attempted murder and conspiracy.
Then on June 4, 2001, the British government agreed to allow Canadian authorities to charge Inderjit Singh Reyat in connection with the bombing. As a British citizen already extradited to Canada for his trial on the Narita charges, Britain had to agree before these further charges could go ahead.
After the British courts approved a waiver of extradition rights, the RCMP formally arrested Reyat on seven new charges including, murder, attempted murder, conspiracy in the Air India bombing, and the explosion at Tokyo's Narita Airport.
The trial and its problems
The trial faced one setback after another. The RCMP's key suspect – Talwinder Singh Parmar – died in 1992 under suspicious circumstances, the result of an alleged gun battle with Indian police. Problems with Reyat's defence team forced the trial to be postponed twice.
It took months before Reyat appointed a lawyer. David Martin finally came on in September 2001. A few months later, the presiding judge postponed the trial from February 2002 to the following November in order to include Reyat's trial with Malik's and Bagri's.
In May 2002, the trial was postponed to March 2003 after most of the lawyers on Reyat's defence team resigned because of alleged fraudulent billing by Reyat's children. Two of Reyat's adult children had been employed to do clerical work on the case.
Shortly after the resignations, Reyat's former defence lawyer, Gibbons, took over as lead lawyer. Gibbons defended Reyat at his 1991 trial for manslaughter in the deaths of two Japanese baggage handlers killed by a bomb at the Narita Airport.
Then on Feb. 10, 2003, in a dramatic turn of events, Reyat changed his story. He pleaded guilty to one count of manslaughter and a charge of aiding in the construction of a bomb. All other charges against him – including the murder of 329 people – were stayed and he was sentenced to five years in jail for his role.
On April 28, 2003, the trial of Ripudaman Singh Malik and Ajaib Singh Bagri began. The testimony, presentation of evidence and arguments lasted until Dec. 3, 2004, just over 19 months.
Crown prosecutors presented their case, saying Malik and Bagri were members of an organization now considered a terrorist group by Ottawa, and presenting witnesses who testified to their involvement in the bombings. Defence lawyers argued their clients had nothing to do with the bombings and said the Crown's witnesses were unreliable.
In the end, the judge ruled that the Crown’s case was too weak and he acquitted Malik and Bagri of all charges.
Relatives of those killed in the bombings expressed their outrage and renewed their calls for a public inquiry. The federal government asked former Ontario premier Bob Rae to study that matter and advise whether that demand should be met.
On Nov. 23, 2005, Rae recommended a "focused, policy-based inquiry" that looks at four areas:
• Whether the assessment of Sikh terrorism was adequate in light of available information.
• Whether the RCMP and CSIS co-operated adequately in the investigation.
• The relationship between intelligence gathered and evidence presented at trial.
• Any breaches of airport security and if those issues have been addressed.
» Bob Rae's report [in pdf format]
On May 1, 2006, Prime Minister Stephen Harper called the Commission of Inquiry into the Investigation of the Bombing of Air India Flight 182 and named retired Supreme Court Justice John Major as its head.
"This inquiry is not a matter of reprisal, nor is it intended to go back over the criminal trial," he said. "It is about finding answers to several key questions about the worst mass murder in Canadian history."
________________________________________
^TOP
MENU
AIR INDIA MAIN PAGE INQUIRY FAQs QUOTES THE VERDICTS THE REACTIONS: VICTIMS' FAMILIES THE REACTIONS MALIK FAMILY STATEMENT KEY CHARACTERS THE VICTIMS SHYLA AURORA: REMEMBERING JUJU SIKH MILITANCY COVERUP? CBC STORIES
TIMELINES: THE BOMBING THE INVESTIGATION THE TRIAL AFTER THE TRIAL
PHOTO GALLERIES: AIR INDIA MEMORIAL AIR INDIA VERDICT AIR INDIA
VIEWPOINT: YOUR LETTERS NOTEBOOK
CBC ARCHIVES: AIR INDIA INVESTIGATION
THE NATIONAL: A RAY OF LIGHT REASONABLE DOUBT
BY THE NUMBERS
329: people killed, 82 of them children
$130 million: estimated cost of the investigation and prosecution of the accused
$7 million: cost of building a high-security courtroom for the trial
$460,000: paid by the RCMP to a controversial witness called "John" in return for his testimony
115: witnesses testified at the trial
19 months: of testimony
3 weeks: for the Crown to complete its closing arguments
150 hours: of taped conversations with Sikh informants destroyed by former CSIS agent who feared Mounties would fail to protect identities of informants
15 years: between the 1985 explosion and the laying of charges in 2000
31,000 feet: distance passengers fell to the Atlantic Ocean after their plane exploded
EXTERNAL LINKS:
CBC does not endorse and is not responsible for the content of external sites. Links will open in new window.
AirDisaster.com page on Air India crash
Canadian Shipowners Association
MORE:
Print this page
Send a comment
Indepth Index
Post a Comment