Because if we look at those bail conditions, and the massive legal costs ahead, that is exactly what these charges seem designed to do.
And they have good reason to want to get these groups out of the way, or at least bog them down in legal hassles at this particular point in history.
Because let's always remember that the gravest crimes of that summit were not the fake lake, or the civil liberties violations, or even the security budget.
The real crime was what the leaders decided to do while they were being so enthusiastically protected.
Nicknamed the "Austerity Summit," Toronto was where they decided to stick the public with the bill for an economic crisis that began with wild speculation on Wall Street.
In previous G20 summits these same leaders failed to close corporate tax loop holes, failed to impose coordinated banking regulation, failed to break up the big banks, refused to impose a bank tax, failed to impose even a miniscule financial transaction tax, failed to eliminate fossil fuel subsidies, and of course resolved to continue waging wars.
So how would they come up with the revenue to cover their shrinking tax bases thanks to layoffs and foreclosures? They would cut social programs, of course.
The G20's final communiquà © in Toronto instructed governments to slash their deficits in half by 2013.
This is a huge and shocking cut, and we all know who will pay the price:
- students who are seeing their public educations further deteriorate as their fees go up, which is why they were on the streets of London yesterday, occupying the headquarters of the Tory Party;
- pensioners who are losing hard-earned benefits, which is why they have been on the streets of France for weeks;
- public-sector workers whose jobs are being eliminated, which is why we have seen massive strikes in Italy and Spain. And the list goes on.
Here in Ontario, well before the G20, the poor were already paying the cost of the crisis. To cite just one example, this year the Provincial government shamefully abolished the "special diet" allowance -- a program that gave people on social assistance with health conditions just a little bit more every month so that they could afford foods that don't make them sick.
That program cost $200-million a year. As John Clark pointed out during the G20, the cost of security for the summit could have paid for that program for five years.
At the federal level, the Tories are on course to slash stimulus spending that includes a billion dollars a year for the construction and renovation of social housing. Meanwhile they are paying Lockheed Martin $9-billion for new fighter jets, with an anticipated $7-billion more in maintenance costs.
And we all know that under Rob Ford, we are going to have to fight to defend the public transit system and other services on which working people depend.
We gathered on the streets of Toronto during the G20 because we know there are other ways to make up a budget shortfall. Like getting the hell out of Afghanistan and not building new prisons at a time when Canada's crime rate has been down for a decade.
But our politicians have chosen a very different route, and that route necessarily means more social unrest.
And that has everything to do with why the security costs were so high during the G20.
Next Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
1
1
1
