the daily snivel

Such is the joy in the household today, as I can happily say that after an entire week of mysterious absence the cat has been found. How a creature so fastidiously accustomed to long naps, large meals, regular helpings of cat treats and oodles of snuggle-wuggles (and whose "Lost Cat" poster indicated that he also responded to the name "Sweetie" and "Little Boy") could decide that he wanted to rough it outdoors in the middle of a frigid Canadian winter for a week, I'll never know. But anyway, he's back, and apparently none the worse for the experience (aside from a slight cat cold accompanied by sneezing).

We've been leaving food out on the front porch for the cat in case he found his way back and was hungry, though it seemed most heavily frequented by two other kitties from the neighbourhood over the past week. That said, two large bowls of food put out at night would invariably be completely empty the next morning, which at least suggested that the food was appreciated, whether by our cats, or just cats generally, or even the local racoons. Indeed, during our postering and canvassing of a five block radius around the house, we discovered a lot of friendly people who put out food regularly for their cats and for neighbourhood strays. Some people loved cats so much that they called not to report a lead (though we had many people calling and telling us they'd seen a black cat somewhere or other) but to ask whether we'd found the cat yet, and to let them know when we did, and in the meantime expressed their sympathy and promised to keep an eye out. It was sweet.

During his absence, however, we spent an agonizing and heartbreaking week looking for him, canvassing a five block radius around the house, putting up posters, and so on. A friend even walked through the neighbourhood shaking a bag of cat treats (much loved by the missing cat, and part of his daily routine) in the hopes of attracting him. The effort attracted a lot of other cats, not surprisingly (all of whom were of course given treats), but not the fugitive prodigal kitty. In all, we distributed 200 posters and flyers. Natalie put an ad in the newspaper and even had to call the city to see if any workers had picked up a dead cat matching his description, as well as check in at the Humane Society. Worse than having to see all the homeless strays was the fact that the Human Society has a book of the cats who arrive D.O.A. and another for the cats who are so sick or wounded they have to be euthenized on arrival. Even before we found the cat, Natalie she swore she couldn't look at those even one more time.

We found him on Sunday night -- a week after he'd vanished -- in a neighbour's yard. Interestingly, it was technically the other cat (the good one that knows it's an indoor cat) who found him. I was making dinner while Natalie was in the living room, and she noticed that the remaining good kitty was tapping on the glass in the living room. You'd have to know the cat to know this, but she's a big skittish chicken and when she sees birds or another cat or (God forbid) a raccoon on the front porch, she jumps out of the window and chatters excitedly. This time, she just tapped. Natalie took a cue and opened the front door to take a look, notwithstanding that one or the other of us would anxiously open the front door in vain every ten minutes or so otherwise. But it was practically a blizzard outside and there, in the freshly fallen snow, were new paw prints that ended right at the front door. I was called to pursue the trail, and trudging out into the night without so much as a coat, I followed the prints through a laneway and well beyond the house to the fence to a neighbour's property line. There, sitting atop a snowbank butting up to the fence was the cat.

Of course, being a cat, and particularly one who had already caused us so much anxiety and grief, he jumped over the fence and took off into the night in a terrified, mad little panic when I approached him with a promise of safety, warmth, and salvation. I ran back to the house and fetched a bag of cat treats. I then dashed back to the snowbank and proceeded to shake the bag as hard as I could, calling his name and hoping to coax him back to me. It took about five minutes, but eventually he heeded my call and cautiously crept back into the yard and stopped on the other side of the fence. Although he was mewing pathetically, he wouldn't climb back on top of the shed in that yard and jump back over -- perhaps he had forgotten how he'd done it in the first place. Natalie, meanwhile, ran around the block in the hopes of catching him from the other side. She homed in on the sound of my voice, and discovered that (luckily) she could get into the yard from the street. She had her own bag of treats, and I cautioned her not to charge the cat, as he'd simply bolt away again in his panic. Instead, I told her to stay where she was and call him to her. And so she did. I mean, this cat is her baby. She called to him in a melodic, loving voice that he could not possibly resist -- and, of course, there were also treats to be had too -- and slowly, timidly, and with some trepidation, he began to move towards her.

The cat almost fled once or twice, but Natalie remained patient and called him with renewed urgency. Eventually he returned to the right path and came towards her. She started throwing treats into the snow to lure him closer. It was plain to see that he wanted to be rescued, but was so confused and frightened after a week on his own (his first week outside since being rescued one Christmas day several years ago as a frostbitten, wormy, starving little kitten) that he couldn't be sure of what was safe. Once he was close enough, Natalie extended her arm and tried to pet him. He timidly came closer and closer, realizing that salvation was at hand and, once he trusted enough to put his entire head into her hands, she grabbed him and held on tight. She then left the yard, even leaving the bag of treats where it lay for the neighbours to puzzle over come spring. I ran back to the house and grabbed the cat carrier, as he began to squirm and struggle once he was picked up, and it's hard to fend off 13 pounds of determined legs and claws for an entire walk around the block home.

When I reached the pair on the street, we literally poured him into the carrier out of Natalie's arms -- he seemed happier to be inside the confines of the box, which at least smelled familiar, rather than be hoisted in the air near the steady rush of traffic (which utterly terrified him). Once back inside, he quickly put on the air of a creature who might only have stepped out for a few minutes and not an entire week. He rolled around on the floor, sniffed his favourite spots approvingly, and rubbed up against people's legs. The only evidence of his absence was the fact that he was desperately thirsty and that the other cat refused to accept that he was the same creature she had been missing and pining for not an hour before, and growled and hissed whenever he was in sight. I mean, she never really liked him, but she'd grown accustomed to his presence to the point of fondness because he kept things interesting, and was manically strung out and needy while he was gone.

So, things are back to normal now. An enormous weight has been lifted from me, since I had allowed him to escape in the first place and felt horribly guilty for my inattentiveness. And the house where I've been staying since my return to Ottawa is again a complete home, with none of the ache or anguish of worrying about a lost friend.

Well, maybe you have to be a cat person to understand. 

Between representing tenants at the legal clinic and my ever-ongoing search for a new apartment, I've come across some resources that are really helpful for tenants who want to know more about their rights and obligations. One of the reasons I went to law school was because I didn't know much about what being a tenant entailed and got taken advantage of as a result. Additionally, I really found it satisfying in those times when played the part of an advocate and stood up for some housemates who were being treated poorly by other tenants (including one case when a housemate was about to be summarily evicted by the lease-holding tenant) and wanted to be able to stand up for others.

Anyway, a lot of people just starting out have some misconceptions about what it means to be a tenant. They think you can break a lease by giving 60 days notice or that if your roommates move out, you're not responsible for their share of the rent. Most people don't know that your landlord is obliged (in Ontario) to pay you annual interest on your last month's rent deposit. The links I have are relevant to Ontario law only, but they're good things to know.

University of Ottawa rental housing checklist of things to do and not to do

Tenant Tip Sheets from the Advocacy Centre for Tenants Ontario. A great resource with fact sheets about such matters as rent increases, what sorts of deposits are illegal, what to do in the case of an illegal eviction.

Landlord and Tenant publications by Community Legal Education Ontario. More great booklets on such topics as how the eviction process works, how to make an application to the Ontario Rental Housing Tribunal, and the legal ways to move out early.

The Ontario Rental Housing Tribunal website -- The mothership itself. This is where you can find out more information about accessing the Tribunal and download lots of handy forms.

As always, let it be said that none of this is legal advice. If you have a legal problem or question, please consult your local Community Legal Clinic (check www.legalaid.on.ca or your phone book). 

It seems that last night while I was taking out the trash, one of the cats snuck outside without being noticed, or at least was not present at roll call this morning when the treat bag was shaken and food was put in the dish. He is strictly an indoor kitty (besides which, he's a bit "slow, eh?"), so this is not a tenable predicament for such a creature in the dead of January. Besides which, we live on two very busy streets and we're worried sick he might have been struck by a car.

I feel beside myself with guilt, wishing I'd been paying more attention to him and that I hadn't been so foolish as to fail to consider the possibility last night. I'm sure he'll turn up, but in the meantime I am literally worrying myself sick and filled with a heavy weight of guilt and self-loathing.

All that to say, if you have a pet, be sure to make it feel extra special and loved today since you just never know what could happen tomorrow (and you'll need its solace tomorrow morning when you wake up to a Conservative victory in the elections). The same goes for your mother of course. Have you called her today?

But put a candle in the window for lost, cold kitties first and foremost. 

I'm changing my host and domain registrar for bigjuicybrains.net today, so if in the next few days the site doesn't load or seems to disappear or otherwise acts dodgy, don't worry, it's purely temporary.

What you should do in the meantime is get ready to vote. I already registered and voted at an advance poll, so on election night I can sit down with some beer and at least be in comfort whilst I shudder at the returns and the prospect of waking up to our new Conservative insect overlords. 

There's a rough coalition of left-leaning Canadian blogs known as Progressive Bloggers, which includes some of the best progressive writers you're likely to come across, leastwise outside rabble.ca or the traditional media. I've linked to a few of them, such as The Amazing Wonderdog, Accidental Deliberations, and Peace, Order and Good Government, Eh. The Progressive Bloggers site aggregates postings from its membership and highlights articles recommended by readership. The site itself is non-partisan, but the staff has taken the unusual step of announcing an "anti-endorsement" with regard to two candidates who are not furthering a progressive agenda for the upcoming election.

One of them is Liberal MP Sam Bulte, who I wrote about earlier with regard to her troubling stance on Canadian copyright reform. Here is the statement from Progressive Bloggers:

...

Whether the proposed new copyright law has merit or not is one thing; the fact that Buite is getting campaign donations and fundraisers from what Geist calls the "pro-stronger copyright lobby" is quite another. The list of her contributors can be found in this Toronto Star article here, and it has caused Geist to charge that there is a perception of "pure influence-peddling" and he questioned whether someone who was taking donations from the lobbyists should be sitting on any committees, or be a Cabinet Minister, or be involved in any capacity where attempts to shape copyright policy is being formulated.

As for Bev Oda, she is the Heritage Critic for the Conservative Party and is running for re-election in the riding of Durham. Professor Geist shows that the copyright lobby has decided to play both sides of the fence and has decided to fund her as well. Her list of donors from lobbyists is also quite extensive, leading Geist to charge that "the leading candidates for the Minister of Canadian Heritage position from both the Liberals and Conservatives have accepted copyright lobby campaign contributions ...Canadian copyright policy has degenerated into a funding battle between large corporate interests (whether foreign or Canadian) with little regard for the interests of the actual artists, creators, users, and the general public".

Here at Progressive Bloggers, we agree with Professor Geist and the growing chorus of others who are not comfortable with the appearance of American-style lobby-group politics in Canada. In the US, the Republicans, led by Tom Delay and his supporters (most notable among those the recently convicted lobbyist Jack Abramhoff) have shown how this type of influence can lead to corruption and pork-barrel politics and can seriously endanger the political process's integrity. We at Progressive Bloggers want nothing to do with this, and want it kept out of Canada.

Therefore, the staff at Progressive Bloggers are announcing our opposition to Sam Buite's and Bev Oda's attempts to be re-elected, and we ask the voters of those respective ridings to vote for a candidate who is not beholden to the pro-copyright lobbyists, and to oust them.

Good reasons for even cynical members of Generation X Generation Y whatever generation we're supposedly at now to vote in the next election.

... and in particular, to add my own endorsement, to vote NDP. 

There's an attention-grabbing headline for ya.

Anyway, here's an interesting thought. Writing on Toronto's recent spate of gun violence, Linda McQuaig suggests that we are in fact simply paying the price for 10 years of tax cuts:

Ten years ago, Mike Harris slashed Ontario's welfare rates by 22 per cent, thereby cutting by almost one-quarter the incomes of Ontario's most vulnerable families. The young kids in those vulnerable families are now teenagers. Recently, there's been an upsurge in violent crime by gangs of teenagers. Is it far-fetched to think there might be a connection?

...

The Harris government also cut spending on an array of programs aimed at ensuring disadvantaged kids integrate into the mainstream. It cut funds for teaching English to immigrants, for social workers in the schools, for community recreation. And when some kids behaved badly, it banned them from school with a “zero tolerance” policy. Where did we think they would go?

...

We've toughened up our laws considerably, including mandatory minimum sentences for gun-related crimes. But if we really want to make this a liveable society, not just enjoy the satisfaction of locking up bad people, we should intervene much earlier.

...

Tax cuts may put more cash in our pockets. But are we really better off if we have more cash for shopping — yet no longer feel safe to go shopping?

I think this argument is worth seriously thinking about. Even a city like Toronto, which had an overall murder rate of 78 homicides out of a population of 2.5 million in 2005 (52 of which were shootings) pales in comparison to U.S. cities of a similar size. For instance, Chicago had 446 homicides in 2005 for a population of 2.8 million, and Houston had 329 homicides for a population of 2 million. While there are diverse causes and motivations for murder, it is striking that similarly-sized cities across the border would have such dramatically higher murder rates. To be clear, I would never suggest that one factor overrides all other variables in such a complicated equation as violent crime and murder. That said, I do think Canada's social safety nets, relative to those of the United States, may well play a role in our lower homicide rate. I think there is less alienation and frustration and anger in our culture -- and yet we see these things increase the more cuts we make to the welfare and medicare systems that greatly distinguish our society from the United States.

So why aren't we spending more money on after-school programs, community and recreation centres, social assistance, education -- in a word, crime prevention? And why aren't we insisting that our politicians make it a priority to include such priorities in a balanced budget? Spending money on police, courts, and jails can only punish crime -- but not prevent it from happening in the first place.

And for all our (rightly justified) outrage and anguish over recent and senseless tragedies, harsh penalties can only ever be applied in hindsight after the next tragedy, and thus does nothing to make the streets safer for the people that tragedy will befall upon. 

Copy protection and copyright issues are of great interest to me, particularly with regard to recorded music. I don't download pirated music as a general rule, since I believe in paying artists for their work and anyway I have a dial-up internet connection (hey, it's free) which makes downloading anything larger than an e-mail message a painful ordeal.

That said, I insist on being able to retain adequate control over the music I buy, and I'm extremely irritated by copy-protection schemes that prevent me from enjoying my music to its fullest. If I can't transfer songs to my iPod or make a mixed CD for a friend, then there's no point in spending money on the music in the first place since all I can do is play it on a CD player I'm never home to enjoy. I've purchased two or three CDs in my time that prevented me from putting the audio I bought onto my hard drive and thus my iPod.

Such schemes are thus ridiculously short-sighted for those seeking to protect their content -- it infuriates and alienates the average consumer, while doing little to thwart those with the technological capacity -- and profit motive -- to rip and copy CDs in huge numbers. I love buying music on-line at the iTunes music store (on those rare occasions I'm somewhere with high-speed internet and a CD burner) for the reason that I can buy the songs I want one-by-one, and do a relatively large number of things with them. This includes making as many mixed CDs as I like and authorizing them to be played on up to 5 computers, plus (of course) my iPod.

As such, I'm much less inclined to buy entire CDs these days, particularly in light of dumb-assed moves like this:

Coldplay's new CD comes with an insert that discloses all the rules enforced by the DRM they included on the disc. Of course, these rules are only visible after you've paid for the CD and brought it home, and as the disc's rules say, "Except for manufacturing problems, we do not accept product exchange, return or refund," so if you don't like the rules, that's tough.

What are the other rules? Here are some gems: "This CD can't be burnt onto a CD or hard disc, nor can it be converted to an MP3" and "This CD may not play in DVD players, car stereos, portable players, game players, all PCs and Macintosh PCs." Best of all, the insert explains that this is all "in order for you to enjoy a high quality music experience." Now, that's quality.

This seems to be confined to the Indian release of X&Y on Virgin Records, but I can't think of a more infuriating and frustrating music experience. I wouldn't buy a Coldplay CD in any case, but many people would, and if such a popular group can be locked onto a CD like this in one market, it's only a matter of time before my favourite artist is no longer playable in most of the ways in which I like to enjoy my music. With the prevalence of Sony's recent rootkit sneakiness (that involved Sony label CDs installing stealth anti-piracy software on one's PC)

The issue of how free music fans are to make fair use of the music they have purchased is heating up in Canada, where the status of our copyright law as it applies to music sharing is in fluctuation. In the Parkdale-High Park riding of Toronto, Liberal MP Same Bulte is being funded heavily by the Candian Recording Industry Association, indicating their hope that her victory in the upcoming election will reward attempts to reform Canadian copyright laws:

Sam Bulte, the Canadian Liberal Party MP for Parkdale/High Park is having her election campaign bankrolled by the Canadian entertainment cartel. Bulte previously authored a one-sided report proposing crazy, US-style copyright laws for Canada, and now her pals from the Canadian Recording Industry Association are throwing her a $250/plate fundraiser -- just the kind of high-ticket event that the poor artists Bulte claims to represent can't afford to attend. Instead, expect this dinner to be stacked with industry fat-cats.

Bulte fired off an angry letter to the Toronto Star in 2004 when columnist Michael Geist outed her for leading the effort to rewrite Canadian copyright laws after collecting big donations from the entertainment industry. Here she is again, though: hoovering up giant corporate bucks while campaigning to deliver just the kind of copyright laws that will make crooks out of ordinary Canadians and line the pockets of massive, US-owned entertainment companies.

...

Within the boundaries of the Election Act, MPs are of course free to fundraise any way they like and individual Canadians are free to contribute to those same MPs. However, with the public's cynicism about elected officials at an all-time high and Canadians increasingly frustrated by a copyright policy process that is seemingly solely about satisfying rights holder demands, is it possible to send a worse signal about the impartiality of the copyright reform process?

Bulte's NDP opponent is Peggy Nash, the Tory candidate is Jurij Klufas.

I have friends living in that riding, and I'm glad to report that they aren't likely to vote for Bulte.

In the meantime, I guess it's also important to not "vote" for Coldplay. Let the labels get the message.