Federal, Finances, Provincial

The HST and ‘Myths”

Leave a comment

An anti-HST supporter was waving around the anti-HST ‘Top 7 HST Myths’ claiming it was absolute proof that extinguishing the HST was the only choice and that extinguishing the HST would have no negative consequences for BC.

Since he wouldn’t let anyone actually read this ‘proof’ it was necessary to hunt up a copy of a paper with the advertisement in its pages to see what ‘proof’ the ‘Top 7 HST Myths’ offered in support of it being worth accepting/suffering the consequences of extinguishing the HST and returning to the PST/GST.

You can find the information allowing you to reach an understanding of the HST, PST/GST, the issues and consequences of extinguishing the HST by going to http://www.hstinbc.ca/media/Its_Your_Decision_GSTPSTHST.pdf and reading the independent panels report yourself.

Because the Extinguish Yes/No decision will have a significant effect on healthcare and other services and the finances of BC it is imperative for voters to invest the time in getting the facts and not the nonsense both sides are vomiting forth.

What is to be found in the “Top 7 HST Myths?

From Myth 1 “…a total tax increase of $1.6 billion per year”; from Myth 2 “…increases taxes for British Columbians by $2.8 billion per year”; from Myth 7″ over $28 billion in new taxes in just 10 years” – $28 ¸10 = $2.8 per year and “the independent panel says the HST generated $850 million more than budgeted.” [the GST was implemented a year ago – July 1, 2010]

So is the tax increase $1.6 billion a year? $2.8 billion a year? or $850 million a year? DUH!

From Myth 7 “Ottawa collected $300 million more in corporate taxes under HST than under PST”

The HST is a sales tax – ‘corporate taxes’ are income taxes.

Prior to the HST Ottawa collected the 5% GST (Goods and Services Tax) in BC. When the HST was implemented by BC it was BC that made changes to what its sales tax was collected on; Ottawa made no changes to the rate (5%) nor on what goods and services that rate applied to.

Under the HST Ottawa collects exactly the same revenue it would have under the GST. DUH!

From Myth 7 “The independent panel says the HST generated $850 million more than budgeted.”

Where? A question readers can seek an answer to while reading the independent panel report “It’s Your Decision”. While reading the report one can read the biographic information on the panel members to form an opinion as to how much weight to give the reports information in making one’s decision.

The report does say that in budget years 2013/2014 and 2014/2015 the HST will generate addition GROSS sales taxes of $820 and $893 million which will NET out to $531 and $645 [NET = GROSS – the HST rebates and income tax breaks].

It would appear the anti-HST forces have so poor an understanding of this matter – GST/PST/HST – they fail to understand what “It’s Your Decision’ is actually saying. Reading “It’s Your Decision” makes it obvious that $1.6 billion or $2.8 billion or $850 million are all incorrect figures for the extra revenue the HST generates. DUH!

From Myth 5 “Bribes of $175 per child when your cost is closer to $400 a year each makes you wonder if they think all of us failed math as badly as they did.”

While reading “It’s Your Decision” you can find the information to take $400 per year and determine how much has to be spent per child to generate an extra HST cost of $400 an year. When you do the math – which is rather straight forward and simple – you find that in order to pay $400 more per year per child you need to be spending $33,613.00 per child. Might I suggest that anyone spending $33,613.00 per child per year can afford to pay the extra $400 per child per year in taxes?

Speaking of “…failing math…” – DUH!

From Myth 4 “A onetime rebate of $175…”; from Myth 5 “Bribes of $175 per child…”.

There is the possibility that what these statements reflect is that the anti-HST vote is so committed to ‘winning’ and/or ‘punishing the Liberal government’ they will lie by omission.

On the other hand, with the degree of ignorance and the lack of understanding demonstrated in “Top 7 HST Myths” by the anti-HST forces, the proponents of extinguishing the HST may be ignorant of the $232 million in HST rebates that will be paid out to British Columbians every year and the $200+ million dollars in yearly income tax breaks British Columbians will benefit from with the HST. DUH

From Myth 4 “Seniors and people on fixed incomes are some of the hardest hit by the HST”; from Myth 5 “Next to seniors working families are among the hardest hit by the HST…”

The HST is a sales tax, a consumption tax. The more you spend, the more you consume, the more things you purchase and the higher the cost of your purchases (designer clothes, Ferraris, etc) – the more HST you pay. Those hardest hit by the HST are the big spenders, the wealthy who can most afford to pay more.

If you are a low income earner, poor, living in poverty, living on a (low) fixed income you get HST rebates and/or income tax breaks.

The lower your income, the better off you are financially under the HST. DUH!

From Myth 7 “We’ll owe $1.6 billion if we cancel the HST – False”; BC has received only $1 Billion”.

BC has received two payments from Ottawa, one received when the HST legislation was introduced in the BC legislature and one received July 1. 2011 when the HST went into effect totalling $1.124 billion. The final $475 payment was due July 1, 2011 but with the scheduled referendum on the HST has not been paid and will not be paid until the HST is approved in the referendum. The $1.6 billion represents the total compensation BC was to receive for the HST.

While it is true BC will only need to repay $1.124 billion to Ottawa, it will have to ‘repay’ $475 million to the 2011/2012 BC budget to replace the $475 million it was to have received on July 1, 2011.

No matter how you slice it, BC and BC taxpayers will be out of pocket the $1.6 billion it was to receive from Ottawa for implementing the HST. DUH!

From Myth 7 “the HST generated $850 million more than budgeted……government already has $850 million to repay Ottawa. BC has only received $1 billion and Ottawa collected $300 million more in corporate taxes under the HST than the PST. So it’s a wash.”

As noted earlier 1) the HST has not generated $850 million more than budgeted; 2) BC has received $1.124 million and will have to forgo the final $475 million dollar payment; 3) Ottawa collected the same revenue under the HST as it would have under the GST – there was NO ‘extra’ $300 million collected.

It is not ‘wash’. If the HST is extinguished the BC budget will be out $1.6 billion, and that $1.6 billion will have to be replaced. Either taxes will need to be raised $1.6 billion OR healthcare, other government services and expenditures will have to be reduced $1.6 billion. In other words voting to extinguish the HST is voting for less healthcare (more beds in the hallways, longer waits for services at hospitals and so on) DUH!

Myth 7 “”keeping the HST would cost British Columbians – over $28 billion in new taxes in just 10 years’

If you use the 2013/2014 and 2014/2015 numbers from “It’s your decision”, accepting the 25% year-to-year increase in revenue and do the math you get an estimated $10,875 billion which is a far cry from $28 billion (“failed math”?). Duh!

Top 7 HST Myths – the fallacies and WTF are they thinking.

Why would you ever assume that, given our current economy and the demands taxpayers have been making on government, that any HST dollars collected above the budgeted amount remain available to repay Ottawa?

The sluggish economy means that other revenue sources have brought in less dollars that budgeted. The demands taxpayers have been making for more government spending (services) means spending is over budget. Less revenue, more expenses where is the money to cover the budget shortfall to come from? That’s right – the extra revenue generated from the HST. Leaving no mythical big pool of money lying around to repay Ottawa the $1.124 billion and replace the forgone/lost $475 million – $1,599 billion that will have to come from the pockets of British Columbians. DUH!

Declining/returning the $1.6 billion from Ottawa.

Most of the $1.6 billion that BC was to receive from Ottawa came out of the pockets of Canadians other than BC residents. Personally I favour letting Canadians living outside of BC pick up the tab for most of the $1.6 billion. For some unfathomable reason the anti-HST forces want to return this money to other Canadians and have British Columbians pay extra taxes to cover the $1.6 billion.DUH!

That there is and will be no need for new taxes to pay for services provided to citizens by the BC government; that if the HST is extinguished the extra funds the HST would have raised will not have to be raised by other taxes/fees.

While the statement “the ‘independent panel’ says…” would seem to imply the anti-HST forces have read “It’s Your Decision” their own words in “Top 7 HST Myths” make it abundantly clear that if they did read “It’s Your Decision” they failed, or lacked the capacity, to understand the budgetary and financial realities of the Province of BC.

The report, in plain language, sets out the reality that BC, without extra funds (taxes) from somewhere, is facing the need for significant cutbacks of budget expenditures (services such as healthcare).

Indeed the report specifically cites the way healthcare costs are ballooning and the reality that even with the hundreds of millions of extra tax dollars generated by the HST healthcare costs will outstrip the ability of the province to fund healthcare.

So, whether it be from the HST or some other combination of taxes/fees the province of BC either needs significant increases in revenue or to make significant reductions in healthcare, education and other services.

The real question that needs to be addressed isn’t as to whether the HST is raising more money – it is – the question is what are those funds being used for and what are the consequences if those funds are lost.

Finally, the true falsehood revealed by “Top & HST Myths” is the myth that the anti-HST forces understand the issues and consequences involved in extinguishing the HST.

The ‘proof’ contained in “Top 7HST Myths”, set out in the anti-HST forces own words, is that the anti-HST forces lack an understanding (lack the mental acuity to understand?) of the financial and budgetary realties facing the Province of BC or of the nature and workings of the HST.

Disturbingly, if the anti-HST forces cannot comprehend the issues surrounding the provincial budget and the HST – they cannot understand or appreciate the far reaching negative consequences of extinguishing the HST.

Which is at least a more acceptable reason than self-aggrandizement or malice for why the anti-HST forces are working so hard to lead British Columbians off a cliff and int0 self-destruction of the provinces finances, healthcare and other services that would be brought about by extinguishing the HST.

I will be voting NO to the question of extinguishing the HST because of the far reaching consequences.

I urge you to go to http://www.hstinbc.ca/media/Its_Your_Decision_GSTPSTHST.pdf and read “It’s Your Decision” – the independent panels report – for yourself. Read carefully, give it careful thought and make up your mind based on facts not ‘myths’ or hyperbole.

Caveat emptor, Consider, Federal, Media, Municipal, Provincial

Unpalatable perhaps – but REALITY none the less.

Leave a comment

Reality does not care what you want to be fact, reality does not care what you believe to be fact, Reality simply is what IS fact. Tao of James

I wanted to speak of a reality I have no doubt many will Howl about, deny or want to argue about. Which is fine with me – as long as you read the entire comment and think about why I made the statement of Reality IS in fact – as defined by our actions – not our words but our actions.

It is a source of pride for many of Abbotsford’s citizens that Abbotsford has a reputation as the Bible Belt, a very Christian city. False pride as a recent event and the reaction and behaviour of Abbotsford citizens to that event have compellingly proven.

Despite its diverse multicultural and multi-faith nature British Columbia also considers itself a predominantly Christian province. Here also the reaction and behaviour of the citizens of BC to that recent event prove compellingly that British Columbians are clearly deluding themselves as to any relationship between BC and Christianity.

Many Canadians think of Canada as being a Christian nation, a nation of Christian values. Again the reaction and behaviour of Canadians to that recent event have compellingly proven that Canada is demonstrably neither Christian nor does it honour Christian values.

Mr Harper and his Conservatives like to wrap themselves in their moral superiority as Christians. However the depravity of Mr Harper and his Conservatives recent spiritually corrupt behaviour makes clear that the ‘christianity’ of Mr Harper and his Conservatives is merely “sheep’s clothing’ to make them more electable and has nothing to do with Christ’s teachings.

What was this singular event?

It was Mr Harper stating he and his Conservatives are comfortable exporting death because it is profitable (and undoubtedly helpful in gaining seats in the House in the region of Quebec mining and exporting the asbestos).

Remember you cannot use asbestos in any form in Canada; should you disturb asbestos in a building you must call in specialists to remove the asbestos – wearing full environmental suits, using airlocks and special air filtration units to remove the asbestos from the air, showering off the suits and washing all surfaces down to prevent any asbestos from spreading or being left; and asbestos must be properly packaged up and disposed of in an approved disposal site.

All of this because asbestos is a highly hazardous and toxic material that causes asbestosis, cancer and death.

Yet Canada is exporting asbestos, along with its travelling companions – asbestosis, cancer and death because it is profitable – and opens a political opportunity for Mr Harper and his Conservatives.

What makes Mr Harper and his Conservative’s demonstrated distain for human life even more abhorrent, is the fact that Chrysotile asbestos will not be listed as a hazardous industrial chemical that can be banned from import after Canada helped block consensus, despite the fact that the scientific review body of the Rotterdam Convention recommended the inclusion of “white” asbestos on health grounds..

For Christians the question is what Christ would do and say about this export of death for profit and political advantage?

Christ would undoubtedly speak of the need to forgive and love those who engage or allow this trade in death; to pray that those dealing in death or permitting this trading in death find their way out of the darkness and into the light – putting an end to the exporting of death.

But would a Being who preached and lived not just loving your neighbour as yourself, but to love your enemies; to do unto others as you would have them do unto you; spoke not of vengeance, harming or killing others but of forgiveness and love find exporting death for money tolerable?

No.

This export of death is behaviour that is abhorrent to anyone, any being or Being, with honour, integrity and ethics – and to any true Christian.

The actions of Mr Harper and his Conservatives since they first formed the Government of Canada have demonstrated that while Mr Harper and his Conservatives may speak of morals or integrity or ethics, they will not let anything stand in the way of political power for them. Thus it is no real surprise that with a political advantage to be had Mr Harper and his Conservatives will not only support the export of the suffering and death that goes with asbestos, but bloc international attempts to protect people around the world from this export of death that may interfere with their political power and goals.

Mr Harper’s statements were made on the day the riot in Vancouver occurred. The airwaves were filled with hours of broadcasting on what was and had occurred on the streets of Vancouver; with righteous indignation, condemnation, outrage……..

For what was, when all is said and done, damage to property, ego and a black eye for Vancouver’s self-image, image and reputation.

And about Canada exporting asbestosis, cancer and death – Silence.

The people of Abbotsford were not lined up outside Ed Fast’s office to demand an end to this trading in death; they were not jamming his phone lines nor stuffing his email to demand an end to this trading in death; they were not demanding that city council pass a motion condemning the export of death and demanding an end to this trading in death.

The so called ‘christian’ leadership in Abbotsford (BC and across Canada) were silent, apparently undisturbed by the blood of innocents that stains the hands of all Canadians with this exporting of death.

Neither the people of BC nor Canadians were demanding their municipal or provincial governments condemn and demand an end to the export of death; there were NO demonstrations demanding an end to the export of death.

On the question of Christianity in Abbotsford, British Columbia and Canada we have arrived at a syllogism:

To those who practice the teachings and behaviours of Christ, Canada’s export of death is abhorrent, corrupt and depraved and must be strongly, loudly, continually opposed until Canada’s export of death is ended.

Outside of a very few, the reaction in Abbotsford, British Columbia and Canada was/is quiet acceptance of the continued trade in death.

Outside of a very few, the silence in Abbotsford, British Columbia and Canada evidences the lack of those who practice the teachings and behaviours of Christ and are Christian in deeds, not hollow words.

Caveat emptor, Consider

Thoughts on the Vancouver Riots.

Leave a comment

As Ye sow so shall Ye reap.

There are those who point to the size of the crowd as the reason for the riots in Vancouver following game 7 of the Stanley Cup final.

I suspect that even if you only had 50,000 (or just 25,000) people downtown you would have had a riot.

The problem did (does) not lie in the size of the crowd but in the people who make up the crowd.

The images that have allowed, and are continuing to allow, the identification of the rioters, arsonists and looters have made it clear that the common factor the participants share is youth.

Among the first people identified turned out to be: a member of the Canadian junior water polo team with a scholarship to the U of Calgary, a UBC student athlete, someone employed with a good work record….. They were not Anarchists as first claimed by authorities they were……. just youth, many of whom would have been labelled ‘good kids’ or even ‘accomplished kids’.

Which raises the question – what is going on with youth today that ‘good kids’ are rioting, setting cars on fire and looting?

I could talk about how my parents instilled a sense of honour, integrity and ethics where that kind of behaviour was and remains unacceptable. I could talk about how manners and responsible behaviour were drilled into me by actions such as having to sit down and hand write thank you notes for Christmas gifts or the requirement to use please and thank you when asking for something. Or how….

Some would argue that it is the pace of life, the fact both parents often are working, how stressful life is today……

And there is some validity in those points.

Still…….consider the following….

People complain about the failure to respect others property demonstrated by the rioters. But how can we expect young Canadians to have any respect for anything when Canada has a prime minister who, on the very day of the riot, refused to ban the export of slow painful death to developing nations.

You cannot sell or use asbestos in Canada and if you disturb asbestos you must call in removal specialists to remove the asbestos and it has to be disposed of in special disposal sites. That is how hazardous and deadly asbestos is considered in Canada.

Yet the prime minister not only refused to ban the sale of asbestos – which causes asbestosis, cancer and death – to the developing world, the prime minister was having Canada oppose a UN motion that would require the export of asbestos to be accompanied by a warning on the deadly health affect of asbestos.

When it was revealed that prime minister Harper sees nothing wrong with the export of asbestos for profit because it can perhaps win his party a seat in parliament, what were Canadian’s reactions to the news Canada was in the business of exporting death?

Yawn.

When the Chinese where found to have been shipping goods made with lead paint to Canada there were demands the government stop the import of items from China with lead paint – and indignation that China would ship dangerous materials to Canada.

Yet apparently the Canadian public and their elected officials see nothing wrong in exporting asbestos, a far more hazardous material that causes asbestosis, cancer and death.

It is not acceptable for other countries to export hazardous materials to Canada, yet it acceptable for Canada to export hazardous, cancerous and death causing materials to other countries.

How can we expect young people to have respect for people, their possessions or anything when our country and society accepts the export of asbestos and death as business as usual?

Some complain that in their angry frenzy the mob of youth running riot in downtown Vancouver gave no thought to the costs and consequences of their actions, inflicting millions of dollars of damage.

I wonder where they could have learned that behaviour?

Perhaps from the anti-HST leadership? Who in a fit of pique and/or making public mischief have set out to extinguish the HST without giving any thought to the costs and consequences. Or extinguish the HST while in wilful denial of the costs and consequences. Or worst of all extinguish the HST while ignoring the negative, multi-billion dollar consequences and costs to BC’s budget, healthcare and education of extinguishing the HST.

How many have said that those young people had failed to consider the far reaching, long term negative consequences would have on the brightness of their futures?

What bright futures?

I know that most of those among the ‘older or preceding generations’ are in strong, wilful denial but the reality is that we, those older and preceding generations, have – in self centered thoughtlessness – consumed the future of the youth of today.

Most politicians and Canadians are in a state of wilful and strong denial of this reality but, from the Tao of James: reality does not care what you believe is, reality does not care what you want to be, reality simply IS.

While we may not want to face the unpalatable reality that not only are we the first generation that is handing the next generation less than we were handed by preceding generations, but in our insatiable thirst for more, more, more….. we have consumed the future and stuck the kids with the bill for our excesses.

So before we go pointing fingers or shaking our heads or lamenting the actions of the mob and wondering ‘how could or why would they do that?” we had better consider the lessons we have taught and the society we have built with our choices and behaviours.

A society where profit and political advantage are more valuable/important that human life (exporting asbestosis, cancer and death); where childish temper tantrums where the consequences are ignored – or worse, to H*ll with the consequences is raging (HST) and the older generations have sold the future of youth to pay for their own life style and excesses

All our posturing, denial, excuse making and high sounding words really are meaningless, other than to highlight the hypocrisy of our society, when you look at the actions of our society.

It is not simply a matter of ” Actions speak louder than words” but also of “Every society should be considered as having a right to the character which it deserves; that is, to be spoken of according to its actions.”.

Perhaps, in light of our own actions, behaviours and the society that has resulted from those actions and behaviours, we should not be surprised that it happened, but that it does not happen more often.

Perhaps the question we should be asking is not “how could they” but rather what changes in our behaviours do we need to make to set a good example for young Canadians.

behaviour, Consider, Federal, Issues, Media, Municipal, Provincial

Canada’s Trade in Death

Leave a comment

Concordat:

I hereby attest and aver that as a Canadian of honour, integrity and ethics it is depraved, and therefore categorically unacceptable, for Canada to be exporting death (slow, painful death) and industrial disease – in any form and for reasons as perverted as jobs, profits and electoral advantage. I demand that the federal government make this trading in death illegal – immediately.

I call upon all Canadians of integrity and ethics to join in condemning this depraved export of death and industrial disease and demand the federal government make this trading in death illegal – immediately.

I call upon all Provincial, Territorial and Municipal politicians and governments of integrity and ethics to pass motions condemning this depraved export of death and industrial disease and demand the federal government make this trading in death illegal – immediately.

I call upon all Members of Parliament of integrity and ethics to come together, regardless of political affiliation, and make it a priority to immediately introduce and adopt legislation making the export of death and industrial disease illegal – immediately.

In stating that he won’t allow cancer causing asbestos to be reintroduced in Canadian homes or schools but he’s firmly behind allowing Quebec’s asbestos industry to export the death and disease that its product causes to willing buyers abroad, hoping that it will enable the Tories to win a seat in the area; in ignoring the fact Conservative MP Chuck Strahl did not seek re-election because he has been diagnosed with incurable lung cancer – mesothelioma – believed to be triggered by breathing asbestos when he was younger; Mr Harper has demonstrated a level of ethical and spiritual corruption and turpitude such that he is unfit to be involved in any manner with the governing of Canada and such that his presence in Ottawa defiles Parliament, the Government of Canada and the Citizens of Canada.

Mr Harper and any members of his caucus, indeed any Members of Parliament, Provincial, Territorial or Municipal politicians supporting this trade in death on the grounds of profit, jobs and/or political advantage are unfit to be associated in any manner with the Government of Canada, any Province, Territory or Municipality and must resign.

Should Mr Harper refuse to resign, a high probability outcome given the level of depravity his statements, actions and non-actions on the prostitution of Canada by trading in death, it is the moral duty of the Conservative caucus to remove Mr Harper from the caucus and any association with the Conservative Party.

Should the Conservative caucus choose to join Mr Harper and descend to his level of ethical and spiritual corruption and turpitude, any members of the Conservative caucus with integrity and ethics must resign the caucus and serve Canadian citizens by sitting as independents and working with other Members of Parliament possessing integrity and ethics to stop Canada and Canadian business from exporting death.

All Members of Parliament with integrity and ethics must not only wrest control of Parliament from those so depraved as to see nothing wrong with trading in death and put an end to this trading in death, but must also do all within their power to end any connection between Parliament and any members of parliament with a level of ethical and spiritual corruption and turpitude as to refuse to ban the export of a cancer causing death material.

Failure to act on ending this trade in cancer death and disease by Parliament and Provincial, Territorial or Municipal governments demonstrates they are unfit to govern and any government or level of government that demonstrates its’ unfitness to govern should be treated as non-existent.

Unfit governments should be shunned until they demonstrate they are at least minimally fit to be a government.

Whatever government Canadians deserve or are, for the most part willing to accept, no Canadian of any integrity or ethics can accept a government or governments so depraved as to be willing to export asbestos materials that cause cancer and death.

The only course for Canadians of integrity and ethics is to call for the resignation of all those who support or refuse to end the Death Trade and to focus on civil disobedience until at least minimal ethical behaviour is restored to governments in Canada.

We can starve the monstrous beast by refusing to feed it what it must have to exist – citizens financial support.

Forcing the federal or other levels of government to cease to sully all Canadians with their corruption and turpitude will not be easy, but it can be done.

The question every Canadian must ask themselves is what value they place upon their own integrity, ethics, spirit and souls?

Consider, Poverty

I Beg to Differ

Leave a comment

Reading the column “Does Jonathon Van Maren Speak For The Faith Community” there are several points I must disagree with Mr Archer on.

Foremost is the fact that whatever Van Maren and his acolytes may be, they are clearly and undeniably NOT Christians. They cannot even be said to be christians.

Van Maren and his acolytes are like those who claim or are said to be christians, who harangue people with their raving diatribes about the need to keep Christ in Christmas when they should be focused on getting Christ into Christian, into themselves, into their behaviours, into their lives and into their souls, their essence.

Van Maren quotes from the bible and evokes God as the authorities for his pernicious teachings, malignant ideology and repugnant behaviours. While that may allow him to claim to be a Biblian or a Goddian it has nothing to do with being Christian.

Being Christian requires one to base how one lives on the teachings of Christ, a reality that most of those who like to label themselves Christians forget or more likely ignore or live in denial of.

Why “… forget or more likely ignore or live in denial of”? Christ taught not just through his words but through his actions, the way he lived his life. He did not judge, or hate, was about forgiveness – no matter what the trespass – about sharing with those in need [and not simply the crumbs left after one had all the luxuries and toys one wants), he was not about things and possessions but people’s needs, about loving thy enemies, about not throwing the first stone, about loving thy brothers (fellow man) as thyself, about doing unto others as you would have done unto you.

In other words: struggling to live the teachings, the actions, the life of Christ requires a great deal of those who seek to be Christians. It is far, far easier to call yourself christian than it is to be Christian.

Mr Archer questioned why the leaders of the Christian community are silent on Van Maren and his acolytes. The answer is that those he refers to as the leaders of the Christian community no more practice and live as a follower of Christ (and thus are no more Christian) than do the preponderance of those who lay claim to being Christian.

Which is undoubtedly why Ghandi observed: “I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ.”

Christianity exists only where it is practiced. Tao of James

Mr Archers second major error was in calling Van Maren and his acolytes bullies. They are not bullies who bullied. They are thugs who assaulted – traumatized – children with pornography (obscene [abominable; disgusting; repulsive, depraved ] drawings, photographs, or the like). Thugs whose actions make them child abusers.

Recall that child abuse includes the emotional mistreatment of children. So any act or series of acts of commission that results in harm, potential for harm, or threat of harm to a child is child abuse. These acts can occur in schools or communities the child interacts with.

The images Van Maren assaulted and caused harm to the students with were more traumatic and potentially damaging than simply exposing himself to the children would have been.

Worse, Van Maren and his acolytes committed this act of assaulting the students minds for their own self gratification. The only purpose for placing their pornography where children would be assaulted by the pornography was to attract attention to and for themselves. The kind of ‘look at me’ attention grabbing behaviour one would expect from the 5 and 6 year olds Van Maren and acolytes assaulted with their pornography attention grabbing display.

Van Maren and those who helped him perpetrate his harmful and abusive treatment of the children should be charged with child abuse and have their names placed on the appropriate local, provincial and national registries of Child Molesters.