I am John Turmel,
leader of the Abolitionist Party of Canada, a
candidate in the Canadian federal by-election
in Hamilton East. We
wish to abolish interest rates by using
LETS Greendollar Local
Employment Trading System on the national
level rather than the local
level.
To that end, I've
circulated at candidates' petition which reads;
I, the undersigned
duly registered candidate in the June 17, 1996
Hamilton East federal by-election, if
elected, shall request that the
Government of Canada institute a national
LETS Greendollar system."
So far, I had
attended the Lake School meeting and I have found a
clip from my personal back-up tape of
my closing remarks which I've
appended to the other transcript but which
I play for you now:
LAKE SCHOOL JUNE 3, 1996 MEETING CLOSING REMARKS:
ABOLITIONIST JOHN
TURMEL: Well, you've had five minutes of me so
far and two now. If you want to have more,
you're going to have go
look at the newsgroups on the Internet:
can.politics, that's where
you're going to find a lot of discussion.
And if you want to know
about the Greendollar system, go to that
web site, u-net.com/gmlets,
it's the first one out of many.
Now Sheila said
she was worried about the little guys and
wanted to help them. So far, she's been
pretty ineffectual, there's
not much the government's been able to
do. But, I have given all the
candidates information which is available
at the back of the room on
how this Local Employment Trading System
works.
Now if your city
could use more local employment, this is how to
do it. Now I don't expect this crew to
really stay with me but I do
expect you to do their thinking for them.
All right, you're their
representative, they're your clappers.
Eighty percent of the people
are going to vote for you independent
of the fact that you don't have
a program so I'm counting on Sheila to
do your thinking for you. I'm
also counting on the NDP and counting
on the the Reform, I'm counting
on the PC to do some thinking for you.
Because if all
the candidates agree that this is a great idea,
setting up a national Greendollar system
so everybody can have a job,
hey, I don't need to get elected. All
I've got to do is send Sheila to
Parliament, to Cabinet with a petition
that says: Set this up. And I
can retire from politics and go play Poker
the rest of my life.
Now, several
people have mentioned monetary reform. And I'm
talking about the Canada Party, they talk
monetary reform, Mr. Knight
talked monetary reform, a questioner talked
monetary reform, I agree
with them all except they don't have it
programmed yet. And I do.
And I'm just
trying to tell these monetary reformers that this is
what you want. Except, we're a high-tech
party, our code is ready and
we invite the lo-tech parties to pick
up the disk, support us and
start bugging Sheila to take our petition
for a national Greendollar
system to Parliament. Thank you.
TRISTAN EMMANUEL:
John, you're a hard act to follow....
It was a wild
night. We had to drive back from Hamilton to Ottawa
because I had to appear in court to be
designated the legal agent of
someone facing a gambling charge. Then,
after the hearing, it was a
race back to Hamilton in time for the
Beaches 7p.m. meeting. It worked
fine. I got home to Ottawa at 4a.m. I
was up for court at 8a.m. and we
were out of court by 11a.m. with more
than the necessary 6 hours to
make the return trip.
Our second meeting
was at the Beach Rescue building. The Beach is
like a causeway several city blocks wide
cutting off the tip of Lake
Ontario to form Hamilton Harbor. Ships
passed through the beachy
causeway under a draw-bridge which has
now been paralleled by two
side-by-side bridges. Looking to the East,
Beach residents see Lake
Ontario and looking to the West across
the harbor, they see Stelco and
Dofasco steel mills belching their industrial
wastes. Though we all
swam on the Lake Ontario side when I was
a kid, I don't ever remember
swimming on the steel mill side.
There was seating
for 50 or 60 and all the candidates were there.
GEORGE AMBAS tells
us that:
- his brother Louis was killed by a 17-year-old
young offender who's
not going to be punished enough and wants
the Act changed.
NATURAL LAW BILL
AMOS tells us that:
- all the problems in society stem from
consciousness.
- they proven programs that reduce crime
by 18%.
- programs would have 87% less hospitalization
for heart disease
- done with yogic flyers as a recently
discovered unified field.
- Washington DC crime rate reduced by
4,000 yogic flyers.
- coherence of consciousness solves all
problems.
INDEPENDENT CHRISTIAN
FREEDOM KEN CAMPBELL tells us that:
- he helped get the supremacy of God recognized
in the constitution.
- Bill C-33 is a flagrant denial of the
theistic principles like the
Hamilton mayor being forced to proclaim
Gay Pride Week.
LIBERAL SHEILA
COPPS tells us that:
- an old political opponent will be missed.
- the Beach is finally getting sewers
but yet must battle.
- we need strong voices on the environment
in Parliament.
- Reform opposed her initiatives.
- the environment is serious and other
promisers don't deliver.
- she cares about environment full time.
CHRISTIAN HERITAGE
TRISTAN EMMANUEL tells us that:
- it's important to look at things lightly
or we could easily be
caught up with "madness" about crime and
impunity.
- it's too easy on criminals.
- government's failing at everything.
INDEPENDENT VICTOR
KNIGHT tells us that:
- most of the debt since 1975.
- doing it right would have been great.
- there is an alternative to cutting spending.
- borrowing from banks at interest rather
than Bank of Canada
interest-free has caused the problem.
- we lost $681 billion in taxes for interest
payments. Sheila was
there.
NEW DEMOCRAT WAYNE
MARSTON tells us that:
- yes, Beaches is being polluted.
- he's running on tax fairness;
- the Young Offenders Act is serious and
has to be addressed.
- he's upset because Liberals refused
to keep their promise on the
GST.
GLEN MALCOLM:
tells us that:
- things are environmentally bad.
- Canada could learn from Japan.
- there's no excuse for pollution.
- he once defeated a land-fill site on
good farm land.
- correcting pollution is cheaper than
the consequences.
- he wants to be spokesperson.
CHARLES OLITO
tells us that:
- manufacturers' tax from business is
legal and direct GST from the
public is unconstitutional (1867);
- we are in debt because the federal government
is borrowing private
funds at interest. That means our money
is bank money contrary to
constitution;
- "usury will wreck any nation" Prime
Minister MacKenzie King;
- federal governments got us indebted;
- no one is talking of paying the debt
of $600 billions of dollars;
- only taking constitutional money control
can tackle the debt;
- he wants binding referenda; the people's
veto;
- proper control of our money can create
the jobs.
GREEN WENDY PRIESNITZ
tells us that:
- Green Party have a larger vision for
Canada that solutions have to
be inter-related.
- she's running for the Green Party leadership.
- she wants to mold the best a more self-sufficient
future for Canada.
- Green society is a locally-based one.
- Green tax reform favors environmentally-sound
locally-owned.
- Greens favor replacing welfare with
Guaranteed Income Supplement.
- Greens want stewardship over the life-cycle
of products.
- Greens want town-hall meetings and proportional
representation.
= Greens want Recall.
CONSERVATIVE ANGIE
TOMASIC tells us that:
- Sheila should have resigned and not
run again.
- she's local
- Sheila shouldn't win.
- Sheila didn't resign immediately and
voluntarily.
- voters told her they want to send a
message that they're tired.
- sending her would tell Ottawa they're
tired.
- Reform tolerate extremist views and
kick out dissenters.
- PCs are a tolerant main-stream conservative
responsible alternative.
- PCs heard the message when thrown out
in 1993 and learned from it.
- she wants to talk about Young Offenders
Act
- she wants to talk about NAFTA
- she wants to talk about tax relief.
- as a bank manager, integrity and honesty
is something I practice.
REFORMER ANDY
SWECK tell us that:
- Manning did not kick out Jan Brown.
- government has ignored crime and safety.
- we must take care of of the environment
for our children.
- we need profitable companies.
- we must support companies so they can
build the infrastructure.
- we support the development of acceptable
environmental regulations.
- Reform asked for an assessment on the
Taro dump.
ABOLITIONIST JOHN
TURMEL tells us that:
- GST is red herring. More important how
we spend than how we tax.
- I'll pay my tax for people's time, not
money's time.
- Sheila Sheila went to Ti-Cat games and
I couldn't.
- interest and taxes for interest stole
my Ti-Cat tickets.
- you can look up LETS on Web starting
at www.u-net.com/gmlets.
- LETS now has over 800 branches and growing
fast.
- they can see meeting transcripts in
can.politics.
- there's a candidate's petition for Canada
LETS.
- other governments have helped.
Now the questions
opened. The first man waved a sheaf of papers
as he asked who gains and who loses in
privatization.
INDEPENDENT VICTOR
KNIGHT said:
- public loses and the new private owners
profit.
- using the Bank of Canada right saves
Hydro $393 billion in 25 years.
NEW DEMOCRAT WAYNE
MARSTON said:
- keep control of those companies.
ABOLITIONIST JOHN
TURMEL said:
- Guernsey Island is a good example of
LETS.
On a question
about a dump, Sheila and Sweck argued back and
forth as if they were in the House. I
just mentioned that:
- funds are lacking and with enough Greendollars,
we could be saved.
- rather than continue to use bank money,
we could use either Olito
and Knight's Bank of Canada money or use
your own with LETS.
Of course, when
Glen Malcolm said" "all these solutions that
everybody's talking about is pie in the
sky," I couldn't stand still
for that and shouted:
JOHN TURMEL:
LETS is not pie-in-the-sky.
GLEN MALCOLM:
Sorry about that, John.
The next man was
concerned with leadership. I just mentioned that:
- my only promise is hand along the software
to the sysop at the Bank
of Canada's computer.
- Quebecers feel ripped off by the English
just as the English feel
ripped off by the foreign ownership by
Americans while both are being
ripped off by the bankers.
The moderator
then caught one of the party clappers. He wanted
questioners from the area and asked those
who lived in the area to
raise their hands. When an unknown clapper
raised his hand, he
challenged him on the address and when
exposed, he said: "Then you,
sir, you just lied."
The next lady
tried to imply that the minor party and independent
candidates had been flown in to disrupt
her election. When I protested
that I just wanted to show them how to
create jobs, she answered that
she had one showing that it didn't occur
to her that others might not
be so well off. So I pointed out those
around her who might be in need
of a job.
Wayne Marston
wondered how many of these people even own a
computer. I guess he doesn't realize that
it only takes one computer
operator in the community to set up the
system for the whole
community.
Angie Tomasic
keeps saying that she won't say she has the answers
and she won't make any promises but she'll
represent us strongly and
take our concerns to Ottawa.
Ken Campbell delivered
a passionate defence of our the right to
stand and beef using George Ambas proclaiming
his concern over crime
as the best example. Since full employment
solves
Georges's problem too, I couldn't help
contradicting: "Except for me."
I tried to explain
international trade as that competition to
avoid foreclosure by exporting what cannot
be sold at home because
price tags on our products are always
greater than the money we got
for producing them by the interest that
had to be paid. It explains
that tariffs and free trade agreements
are all rooted in usury.
I decided to
put some pressure on the two monetary reformers who
should be for this LETS. I did my favorite
joke about the Greens
keeping LETS in the fine print of the
program while I proclaim it
loudly being like them using what I call
a rocket engine in their
lawnmower.
After quite a
bit of talk on free trade, Natural Law's Bill Amos
spoke up and said that what's lacking
is coherence. With the LETS
disk in my hand, I joked: "incoherent
code?"
When he suggested
use of this coherence-generating program would
fulfill their desires for every individual
in every nation, I said: If
you start using this coherence-filled
program. Later I pointed that
his leader, the Maharesh Yoggi, was an
engineer and should understand
this stuff too.
I keep trying
to explain that no number of yogic flyers is going
to stop the banker's bailiff at the door.
No amount of chanting is
going to affect the books.
960605
The next day,
five us appeared for the McMaster Debate. Those who
also attended were Reformer Andy Sweck,
NDP Wayne Marston, Green Wendy
Priesnitz, and Independent Ken Campbell.
The first question
was about
MODERATOR: Hi
and welcome to the CFMU round-table debate. Today,
we're fortunate enough to have 5 candidates
who are running in the by-
election in Hamilton East. You each have
two minutes to introduce
yourselves and talk about any issues:
REFORMER ANDY
SWECK told us that:
- he went to McMaster.
- everybody should be equal.
- will balance the budget to lower interest
rates.
NEW DEMOCRAT WAYNE
MARSTON told us that:
- Sheila's chicken.
- voters tired of broken promises.
- he's for tax-fairness.
GREEN WENDY PRIESNITZ
told us that:
- how the Green Party is different.
- Greens want locally based solutions.
(jct: doesn't
mean that we can't add a few national ones too.)
- Greens want a Guaranteed Annual Income
supplement.
(jct: wonderful,
a dividend share of the robot production)
- Greens want proportional representation.
(jct: I like
that too.)
ABOLITIONIST JOHN
TURMEL told us that:
- Greendollars can effect a utopian vision.
- information on LETS and Hamilton East
on the Web.
- the winner will get a a candidates'
petition for Canada LETS.
- Wendy Priesnitz and Ken Campbell are
for it too.
INDEPENDENT KEN
CAMPBELL told us that :
- he wants to lead us to a national Christian
renewal.
- he wants a flat tax with a $30,000 floor.
- opposes Bill C-33 on gay equal rights.
The first question
was on federal standards. Most felt that they
should be local to serve local needs and
I thought it should be
national to serve them all the same. As
usual, I noted how LETS could
fill the financial gap to allow full standards.
I love pointing out
that all political parties have their
formulae for sharing out the
cuts.
Ken Campbell
pointed out that he wanted an interest-free
financing in his group's program and that
the Greendollar system was
the code he would eventually end up using
if he ever got in.
The next question
was on equal spousal benefits for gays. I love
to cut to the heart of the issue by looking
not at resources to gays
versus straights but by looking at resources
to the children of gays
versus straights. Everyone was in accord
that the children shouldn't
be treated differently so the inevitable
conclusion is that gay
couples shouldn't be treated differently
no matter how much it
vibrates a straight's DNA the wrong way.
I also enjoy mentioning that
God's got better things to do than care
about what we do with our
genitals.
Andy Sweck said
everyone should be treated equally and was
against any special status. Of course,
if everyone were treated
equally, they wouldn't be seeking special
status. Seems more to me
that they're seeking equal status which
is already guaranteed if not
completely delivered yet.
NDP's Wayne Marston
pointed out NDP were in favor of legislation
favoring the gays. So did Green Wendy
Priesnitz. And so did I though I
don't call it a request for special status
but a request for equal
status.
Ken Campbell
pointed out that the Bible frowns on gay and favors
straight sex and it's uncivilized to allow
any change. He thinks
frowning on gays is discriminating conduct
to better society. He
likened the danger to me from gays sex
having sex to the danger from a
drunk driver and later when he said that
such conduct should be
restrained, I could joke that I didn't
see the threat emanating from
the gay's bedroom that I saw from the
drunk's car.
I didn't like
it when he said that gay's shouldn't be allowed to
teach. It just hasn't got through to him
that if a kid's DNA is going
to shiver to the right, it's going to
shiver to the right whether the
parent's DNA shivers to the right or the
left. As a matter of fact, I
did think that one of my teachers was
rather effeminate and pranced
around quite gayly and it didn't stop
him providing me with fine
instruction and it certainly didn't make
me attracted to boys.
As long as people
think that gayness is a learned rather than a
genetic trait, they will see threats in
having gays around them. It's
too bad. I know my DNA shivers unpleasantly
when I think of sex with a
man and I can believe that people who
don't understand DNA shivering
will mistake that natural aversion to
some kind of righteous
indignation. I truly feel sorry for the
gay minority though history
who've had to be thought of not natural
because they're rarer.
Ken's been such
stalwart protester against abortion over many
years that I wonder how he feels knowing
that a certain percentage, 2%
to 10%, of those children that he's saving
are going to end up
sexually shivering the wrong way.
And of course,
the next question was on the GST, the government's
failure to hide from us what they were
going to take from us anyway.
Andy Sweck admits
the Reform are going to get rid of the GST when
they've balanced the budget. So it's as
likely as their balancing the
budget which is not very likely at all.
Wayne Marston
wants to cut it to 5% and take it off some things
and wants long-overdue tax review.
Wendy Priesnitz
wants to take from the bad more than the good.
And of course,
I pointed out that the $180 billion in taxes used
last year to service government debt was
10 times greater than what
they take in in GST. It's funny. They
scream about seeing a trickle
being taken out of their wallets while
a river of interest disappears
without their even noticing that it's
10 times more than the GST. And
I pointed out we could save it all if
we converted paid off our
interest-bearing debts with non-interest
bearing ones.
The next question
was on whether the Native peoples should
receive rent in compensation for being
pushed off their lands. I love
native people's questions because they
were a people who used to use
their own interest-free Wampum Greendollar
system and have been
suckered by the white man into giving
it up and becoming unemployed
with the white man. I first thought up
that joke on my appearance on
the MuchMusic Party Leader's shows during
the 1993 federal election.
After Andy Sweck
had raised the old Indian belief that nobody owns the
sky, nobody owns the sun, nobody owns
the land, I had to suggest he
take a walk on Conrad Black's estate and
explain that to his security
guards.
He said that
we've given them so much money already that paying
rent wouldn't help though they have to
be treated equally.
NDP Wayne Marston
admits they've been ripped off and something
should be done. So does Wendy Priesnitz.
Ken Campbell
told us about his experiences with Indian friends.
The next question
asked us whether we'd choose political
correctness or moral correctness.
Ken Campbell
and Wendy Priesnitz said they should be the same.
Andy Sweck wants character, not political
correctness,
Wayne Marston
says that political correctness is compensating for
discrimination.
I think political
correctness is terrible. I have never seen
racism at a Poker table. I have never
heard one ethnic slur in all my
years. Why is it that people of all races
sitting around a public
Poker table instinctively respect their
opponent irrespective of color
or creed? Because prejudice is irrational
and would bring on the
disapproval, if not the censure, of the
group.
In my youth,
if someone made a racist remark, it offended
some people and cost him friends. "Sticks
and stones will break my
bones but names will never hurt me." Now,
a racist remark is governed
under: "names will EVER hurt me" and the
government's going to help me
get you fired from your job.
I'm in favor
of only allowing the legal remedies against libel and
slander and immediately repealing all
"vocal or written" offences
which are not libelous or slanderous.
If you can't
sue them for libel or slander, don't ask us to shut
them up in a quasi-judicial Star Chamber
Commission on Human Rights. I
don't like the recent expansion of laws
to punish not only what they
did but also what they thought.
I ended by stressing
that one of my goals was to get the other
candidates to support the LETS. Wayne
Marston ended telling us that
more signs than Sheila Copps does.
As you may have
noticed, over my 41 elections preaching the
virtues of usury-free financing, I've
come up with dozens of great
lines and funny routines to fit many occasions.
And unfortunately, I
just can't resist making my audience laugh
as I explain their
ridiculous predicament. After the Lake
School debate, the Hamilton
Spectator mentioned that:
"Some comic relief
was in store from Abolitionist Party candidate
John Turmel who donned a hard hat for
his comments and urged voters to
develop their own barter system for good
and services in Hamilton
East."
It always hurts
when they make it sound the audience laughed at
me when they were laughing with me but
the other parties and
candidates weren't mentioned at all. The
article mentioned Sheila of
course, her main rival Sweck, of course,
independent George Ambas with
his "something-must-be-done" sob story
and the comic relief who wanted
voters to develop their own solution.
So, orating in
funny anecdotes not only gets my message across
better (because those who are laughing
are getting it and those who
aren't laughing are going to try harder
to get it) but if the laughing
is loud enough, it punches through the
media silence and they have to
mention the availability of the barter
system as the simple
alternative because that's what makes
our predicament so funny. The
risk I run in trying to get a mention
by stealing the show is that
they can so easily construe the laughter
as being at rather than with
the comedian.
So, has the fact
that my presentations are punctuated with punch
lines detracted from the seriousness of
my message? Who is to say? I
find it the more enjoyable way to approach
the electoral process. I
could be somber and talk about all the
suicides and crime due to
poverty. But that would be no fun. Or
I could be happy as I talk about
the reports of the people on the LETS
who are newly productively
employed? So, anyway, I've been labelled
"comic relief" by the media
so many times that I am happy to now be
able to provide the
transcripts of the meetings so that people
can judge for themselves
what kind of comic relief I provided.
Maybe I should indicate in the
transcripts when the audience broke into
guffaws that didn't subside
for 10 or 12 seconds. Because I make up
a lot of the jokes as I go
along, even I have to laugh at some of
the better ones.
Actually, there
was a lot more to the statement I reported above
during the Beaches debate as:
- Sheila went to Ti-Cat games and I couldn't.
Looking at the
actual transcript of that exchange, you don't see
that it was one of the funniest political
dekes that I have ever
pulled on an opponent and the audience
were in stitches.
The night before,
I had been a pleasant change for Sheila after
being after having been badgered by all
the other candidates. I came
on and surprised her pleasantly by noting
that we had both gone to the
same church. Then she was pleasantly surprised
to learn that I had
been a boy scout at our church at the
same time she'd been girl-guide.
It was an interesting coincidence so far.
Then she was pleasantly
surprised to be reminded that she too
had been in the Pope's parade at
Ti-cat stadium when she was a kid. And
of course, the audience were
laughing at the idea of her and me both
in the Pope's parade. You
might say we both won a lot of goodwill
by that part of the show. But
it was important that I mention that the
Pope's parade ended at Ti-Cat
stadium if I wanted her to fall into the
trap I had set.
So at the Beaches
meeting, when I start doing that routine again,
Sheila recognized every step of the way.
The audience are loving it.
We were like George Burns and Gracie Allen
except that I ended up with
the punch line.
We went to church
together. Yes yes. We went to scouts and guides
together. Yes yes. We were together in
the Pope's parade to Ti-Cat
stadium. Yes yes. At this point, yesterday's
script is covered and she
doesn't know what I'm going to say next
but assumes it's more of the
same. Ti-Cat stadium was part of yesterday's
script so when I ask if
she's ever been to Ti-Cat stadium to see
the Ti-Cats play, what's she
going to do but continue to nod" Yes yes.
As everybody's expecting me
mention some memorable game we might have
attended together, I change
directions and moan that: "Gee, I couldn't
afford to go."
I mean change
from up-beat events down memory lane to down-beat
memories of things she could do that I
couldn't afford to. The
reversal in tone and demeanor was so sudden
and so complete that the
whole audience was rolling in the aisles
and Sheila was the only
person who couldn't laugh at my misfortune.
Sure she could have
laughed too but that would have only opened
her up to another barb:
"Look, she's laughing. She finds this
funny." Again, she would have
been the only person in the place who
couldn't laugh. Like the
football term, I call that "deking" Sheila
out of her shoes but she
took being the butt of the joke well.
Another crowd-pleaser
was the line that "you can build LETS
yourself without any politicians to help
or get in your way."
When everybody
was criticizing Sheila for a wasted $500,000
election, my mentioning that the benefit
was me bringing them the LETS
also brought the house down.
I must admit
that I've been called "Bugs" for reminding people of
Bugs Bunny's for my quick and funny patter.
I am a quick-thinking,
quick-talking, quick-barbing speaker and
the experience of a couple of
hundred debates over 41 election campaigns
has certainly helped load
my quiver of barbs.
But if you delve
into what I have to say about the Greendollar
system being a way to fund out way out
of social and environmental
destruction, you'll see that no matter
how funny the presentation, the
solution offered is a serious one.
960610
All the candidates
were at the Cable 14 television debate. We
were all given one minutes and 40 seconds
at the end and some
questions in between.
This is another
example of a perfectly fair debate where they
handled 13 candidates who all were treated
the same and had the same
chance to respond to every issue that
every other candidate had.
One wonders why
during national elections, the major television
networks do not hold debates between the
leaders of Canada's 9 parties
but only between the leaders of four.
Why can all parties be
democratically handled at the by-election
level but not at the general
leadership level?
Anyway, before
the show started, I had to take a poll of which
candidates were for the Canada LETS and
which were not. I should have
mentioned that Ken and Wendy were already
with me when I broached it
to Victor Knight who promptly said no.
I was stunned but I turned to
Charles Olito and he also said no. Glen
Malcolm and Angie Tomasic also
said no. Andy Sweck, Wayne Marston and
George Ambas remained
undecided. Sheila Copps said she though
the LETS was great locally but
didn't think it was suitable for national
use. Tristan Emmanuel of the
Christian Heritage Party, who had called
the LETS "perfect free
enterprise" at the Lake School meeting
made sure that I wasn't
profiting from advertising LETS, I assured
him it was freeware, and he
said to count him in for a Canada LETS.
Bill Amos of the Natural Law
party keeps saying that their party is
for any scientifically proven
program but doesn't think that 800 working
systems around the world is
scientifically proven enough. He'll need
more studies.
So far, that
was four candidates out of 13 who will petition
Sheila Copps and the Government for a
Canada LETS.
Today, I was
going to send off a letter to both Charles Olito and
Victor Knight. I called Victor and read
him my letter which is as
follows:
:June 16, 1996.
:
:Charles Olito,
:Canada Party candidate in Hamilton East,
:Tel/fax: 905-312-9395/0028
:
:Dear Charles:
:
: I'm glad and
sad to see that you sound just like I did when I
:first started running for Parliament
17 years ago. Make the Bank of
:Canada do it right was my political game.
In engineering terms, an
:interest-free monetary system has the
Laplace Transform: (1/s). In all
:your speeches, you condemn the (1/(s-i))
interest-bearing system and
:urge the Bank of Canada to do its interest-free
job right.
: My efforts to
abolish interest from the Bank of Canada's software
:are notorious throughout Canada. I've
been called "Bank-fighter
:extraordinaire," "bank-basher," "bank-protester,"
"interest-rate
:protester." Since my second election,
I've inscribed my full-time
:occupation as "Banking Systems Engineer."
: In the original
efforts of the Banking Systems Engineer to make
:the Bank of Canada do it right, I engaged
banks in hundreds of court
:battles including the Bank of Canada
right up to the Supreme Court of
:Canada on a motion that the banking system
"restrict their computers
:to a pure service charge and abolish
the interest charge." Had the
:Supreme Court granted my application,
you would now be happy under an
:interest-free Bank of Canada.
: And with the
interest charge abolished, I don't care if it's the
:Bank of Canada creating the chips or
the chartered banks as long as
:they are created one-to-one with the
new production as collateral. Who
:is the casino chip cashier is a minor
consideration when it is always
:done right.
: It's a neat
feeling knowing that you have the solution to your
:city's, your nation's, your world's monetary
woes but it's dejecting
:to find out just how many people have
been totally brain-washed into
:believing the money program is hard to
debug.
:
: So why do you
think my pitch has changed over the years and is no
:longer similar to yours? Up until 1984,
it was all theory and I
:sounded just like you. But in 1984 we
developed the first successful
:LETSystem and since then, I've had 800
world-wide local models of the
:national Bank of Canada model I have
always been preaching. But I've
:found that it's still better to avoid
talking about money and the Bank
:of Canada which is programmed to confuse
and talk about Time dollars
:or Greendollars from a new kind of magical
computer system which they
:don't have to understand but can see
by the press reports that it
:works. So they don't have to be taught
how to ride the machine. They
:can get on it and try it out and read
of the experiences of others who
:did.
: When you try
to explain to someone how their bank account would
:work under an interest-free Bank of Canada
system, you have nothing
:but theory. Sound theory but theory nonetheless.
Now that the LETS has
:proven itself on even large 2000 person
databases, it's the proof
:monetary reformers need to demonstrate
that an interest-free system
:nationally is correct. When I try to
explain how their bank account
:could work under an interest-free Bank
of Canada system, I can show
:them the press reports of how Greendollar
bank accounts work under a
:private system operator.
: Most people
don't realize that the money system is actually a
:program on the banks computers. A software
package called "usury."
:When you both demand that the banking
system be changed, you are
:demanding that they reprogram their computers'
software. Because the
:banking system is electronic, you are
demanding electronic changes be
:made even if you don't realize it.
: If elected,
any changes you would effect on the banking system
:would have to be coded for their computers
to understand. You'd get
:their systems operators (SYSOP) to re-write
the code to effect your
:(1/s) desires. And when they've
done it, you'll notice that it's the
:same code used by the interest-free (1/s)
Greendollar system.
: I can vouch
that the Greendollar system is the software we both
:wish for the Bank of Canada because it
is the software I financed on
:the hunch that it was going to perform
on the Local level what I was
:wishing to suggest we could do on the
national level.
: I invested my
resources in LETS to help me show Canadians what
:you are trying to show them. It's a do-it-yourself
prototype of your
:Bank of Canada model. We're both telling
them that interest-free Bank
:of Canada money is the answer but I can
also tell them that they can
:have a taste of the system by using the
do-it-yourself money kit.
:
: It breaks my
heart when other Bank of Canada reformers fail to
:see that the software you'll end up needing
is already working on
:private databases all over the world.
I understand how you feel
:though. The whole world is lost and you
have seen the solution, the
:way out, where 99.9% of the others can't
see it at all. The fact that
:you can save Canada is not the relevant
consideration here. Victor and
:I can save it too and I've known that
for a lot longer than both of
:you. We all know how it could be done
right by the Bank of Canada but
:how to broach the national agenda is
the problem.
: Bank of Canada
monetary reformers like yourselves face the
:ingrained cognitive dissonance when an
economist responds: Social
:Credit Funny Money means inflation."
When one of you said "Print more
:money," P.C. Angie Tomasic, the banker,
snickered. It's a knee-jerk
:reaction. They don't ask whether there's
been an increase in
:collateral at the cage when the new chips
are issued. They
:automatically assume that there is no
collateral and it's inflation.
:It becomes a real fight to get people
to spend time looking when it
:goes against everything they've been
taught.
:
: With the LETS
Greendollars, we have an up-to-date working model
:of an interest-free currency and the
economists have no response. And
:it's through the fame of LETS that we
have the chance to thrust the
:question of an interest-free Bank of
Canada under their noses by
:presenting the undeniable successes of
the local version of the
:national version we are proposing.
: Did you notice
that Sheila Copps had done her homework and said
:that it was a great system to be done
locally but not nationally. She
:wasn't going to be put down lightly but
officially against a system
:which has been endorsed by the Australian
Parliament. It's got to tell
:you something when the star of the election
has to admit it's a good
:system BUT... And the BUT is that she
doesn't think it can be done on
:a large database and works best on the
local database and that's a
:pretty weak BUT when all the evidence
tends to show the opposite. So
:I'll push her much more. Maybe she might
end up Canada's Maggie Deahm?
: We've had great
difficulty in getting the issue of interest-free
:banking onto the national agenda using
our amended Bank of Canada.
:There is now the chance to get that same
interest-free banking issue
:onto the national agenda but using the
world-established and
:Australian-Parliamentary-approved LETS
model. Just because you are
:right in your advocacy of the interest-free
Bank of Canada model but
:are having difficulty in getting it on
the national agenda, is that
:any reason not to support the chance
to get the same interest-free
:issue on the agenda under another model?
: Let's say the
long-shot pays off and Sheila takes our petitions
:to cabinet and they authorize a parallel
service-charge-based
:LETSystem at all banks. After a while,
the Bank of Canada takes over
:the operation and we end up with what
you want. The Bank of Canada
:running an interest-free software except,
instead of the money being
:called "Canadian Dollars," they'll be
called "Canadian Greendollars."
:
: If this band-wagon
punches its way into Parliament and the public
:agenda with our interest-free demand,
please don't miss this chance to
:be on the monetary reform band-wagon.
You don't want to be run over
:when you could have been in the front
seat.
: As you now know,
Wendy Priesnitz, Ken Campbell and Tristan
:Emmanuel are in the front seat with me.
Victor Knight has just agreed
:to also petition Sheila for a Canada
LETS. We five candidates make a
:demand from a unique political perspective.
Different parties joining
:together on one technical demand for
a Canada LETS. That's 5 out of 13
:for, 3 against, and 5 undecided. To add
you as the last monetary
:reformer to the list of those who want
the issue of a national
:interest-free currency addressed would
make it 6 for, 2 against and 5
:undecided. The more who petition Sheila
to take the demand to Ottawa,
:the more likely it is she will feel pushed
to do something more than
:the usual, which is to file it.
: I must warn
you that if you do miss the "interest-free banking to
:Ottawa" bandwagon because you didn't
like the banner even though you
:agreed with the engineering under the
hood, you'll turn out to be a
:pathetic figure on the monetary reform
landscape. I would have been
:disappointed had you said you could not
decide about Canada LET S but I
:was quite devastated when you said you
were against it.
: I don't mind
officially noting you were not for a Canada LETS in
:1996 but it's truly not a fate any monetary
reformer would desire.
: It is quite
unsettling though that here I am, a monetary reformer
:who not only knocked at the Bank of Canada's
front door to suggest a
:better way but who tried to use sticks
of legal dynamite to get at
:their inner central computer. Now that
I have found a back-door way of
:introducing interest-free banking to
the Canadian public, I can't seem
:to get the new guys knocking at the bank's
front door to join me
:around the back at getting to the bank's
controlling mechanism.
:
: Anyway, this
is your Judgment day. Missing this opportunity to
:push the interest-free banking debate
onto the national agenda is a
:move any monetary reformer would regret
for life.
: Victor and some
other of the petition signers will be joining me
:to go to Sheila's party and present her
with our petitions. We're
:hoping to meet for supper before then
and would hope you can join our
:"interest-free banking to Ottawa" bandwagon.
: Please contact
me or fax me your response or a copy of the
:petition if you can't make it.
:John Turmel
After reading
this to Victor and getting him to agree that a
national interest-free Greendollar system
is a good step toward a
national interest-free Canadadollar system,
he decided to sign the
petition for a Canada LETS with us. Now
we're five out of 13 and I'm
still hoping to hear from Charles and
the other undecideds.
I still think
that getting five candidates in an election to
endorse the same idea is a victory of
some sort. It could turn out to
be an even greater victory if Sheila takes
it seriously.
Tomorrow night,
I'll be going to the winner's victory party to
present our petitions. I've invited the
candidate signatories to join
me and one or two may. Let's see if my
5- or more-name petition can
have a greater effect than some of the
million name petitions which
have made it to Parliament.