Thank you for contacting my office regarding Bill C-30, the Protecting Children from Internet Predators Act.

Canada’s laws currently do not adequately protect Canadians from online exploitation and we think there is widespread agreement that this is a problem.

We want to update our laws while striking the right balance between combating crime and protecting privacy.

Let me be very clear: the police will not be able to read emails or view web activity unless they obtain a warrant issued by a judge and we have constructed safeguards to protect the privacy of Canadians, including audits by privacy commissioners.

What’s needed most is an open discussion about how to better protect Canadians from online crime. We will therefore send this legislation directly to Parliamentary Committee for a full examination of the best ways to protect Canadians while respecting their privacy.

For your information, I have included some myths and facts below regarding Bill C-30 in its current state.

Sincerely,

Vic Toews

Member of Parliament for Provencher

Myth: Lawful Access legislation infringes on the privacy of Canadians.

Fact: Our Government puts a high priority on protecting the privacy of law-abiding Canadians. Current practices of accessing the actual content of communications with a legal authorization will not change.

Myth: Having access to basic subscriber information means that authorities can monitor personal communications and activities.

Fact: This has nothing to do with monitoring emails or web browsing.  Basic subscriber information would be limited to a customer’s name, address, telephone number, email address, Internet Protocol (IP) address, and the name of the telecommunications service provider. It absolutely does not include the content of emails, phones calls or online activities.

Myth: This legislation does not benefit average Canadians and only gives authorities more power.

Fact:  As a result of technological innovations, criminals and terrorists have found ways to hide their illegal activities. This legislation will keep Canadians safer by putting police on the same footing as those who seek to harm us.

Myth: Basic subscriber information is way beyond “phone book information”.

Fact: The basic subscriber information described in the proposed legislation is the modern day equivalent of information that is in the phone book. Individuals frequently freely share this information online and in many cases it is searchable and quite public.

Myth: Police and telecommunications service providers will now be required to maintain databases with information collected on Canadians.

Fact: This proposed legislation will not require either police or telecommunications service providers to create databases with information collected on Canadians.

Myth: “Warrantless access” to customer information will give police and government unregulated access to our personal information.

Fact: Federal legislation already allows telecommunications service providers to voluntarily release basic subscriber information to authorities without a warrant. This Bill acts as a counterbalance by adding a number of checks and balances which do not exist today, and clearly lists which basic subscriber identifiers authorities can access.

I just wrote this in reply.

HAVE YOU READ YOUR OWN LEGISLATION?!?!?!

So, on with it:

Myth: Lawful Access legislation infringes on the privacy of Canadians.

Fact: Our Government puts a high priority on protecting the privacy of law-abiding Canadians. Current practices of accessing the actual content of communications with a legal authorization will not change.

Debunk: Your Government’s priorities are thoroughly irrelevant.  Your bill clearly changes the practices of accessing the actual content of communications with a legal authorisation.  Isn’t that the whole point of the bill? If that isn’t the point – WHY THE HELL ARE YOU PASSING THIS BILL?

Myth: Having access to basic subscriber information means that authorities can monitor personal communications and activities.

Fact: This has nothing to do with monitoring emails or web browsing.  Basic subscriber information would be limited to a customer’s name, address, telephone number, email address, Internet Protocol (IP) address, and the name of the telecommunications service provider. It absolutely does not include the content of emails, phones calls or online activities.

Debunk: Authorities already have ability to monitor personal communications and activities, with a warrant… or, if they’re CSIS, they’ve always had the ability to do this for whomever they feel might possibly be a threat to national security (which as we’ve seen through declassified files over the years, includes pretty much anyone and everyone).

Myth: This legislation does not benefit average Canadians and only gives authorities more power.

Fact:  As a result of technological innovations, criminals and terrorists have found ways to hide their illegal activities. This legislation will keep Canadians safer by putting police on the same footing as those who seek to harm us.

Debunk: The “fact” has nothing to do with the myth supposedly being disproven.  The benefit to average Canadians has to be measured with respect to the costs, too. This will be financially costly to our governments, and is costly to all individual Canadians in the loss of our privacy.  The benefit is not actually proven here by Mr. Toews so I’m not going to do that for him.

Myth: Basic subscriber information is way beyond “phone book information”.

Fact: The basic subscriber information described in the proposed legislation is the modern day equivalent of information that is in the phone book. Individuals frequently freely share this information online and in many cases it is searchable and quite public.

Debunk: Your IP Address is not “phone book information.”  Period. Individuals do frequently choose to share this information online — the difference is that this bill requires third parties to provide it to  law enforcement agencies.  Changing disclosure from optional to mandatory is very significant, and makes the sharing of such information different.  If I had a land line, I could choose for it to be unlisted.  This is not a choice given to me or anyone else by this legislation.

Myth: Police and telecommunications service providers will now be required to maintain databases with information collected on Canadians.

Fact: This proposed legislation will not require either police or telecommunications service providers to create databases with information collected on Canadians.

Debunk:Um, actually, section 6: “(1) For the purpose of enabling authorized persons to exercise their authority to intercept communications, every telecommunications service provider must have the capability to do the following: (a) provide intercepted communications to authorized persons; and (b) provide authorized persons with the prescribed information that is in the possession or control of the service provider respecting the location of equipment used in the transmission of communications.”  How could they possibly have the capability of providing intercepted communications to authorised persons if they aren’t required to intercept communications?

Further, section16: “(1) On written request by a person designated under subsection (3) that includes prescribed identifying information, every telecommunications service provider must provide the person with identifying information in the service provider’s possession or control respecting the name, address, telephone number and electronic mail address of any subscriber to any of the service provider’s telecommunications services and the Internet protocol address and local service provider identifier that are associated with the subscriber’s service and equipment.”  Again, how could they possibly provide this information without maintaining a database of this?

Myth: “Warrantless access” to customer information will give police and government unregulated access to our personal information.

Fact: Federal legislation already allows telecommunications service providers to voluntarily release basic subscriber information to authorities without a warrant. This Bill acts as a counterbalance by adding a number of checks and balances which do not exist today, and clearly lists which basic subscriber identifiers authorities can access.

Debunk: See above. Section 17. Very explicit about this.

I was about to email one of my senators and mention some stuff about the Northern Gateway pipeline, and I found this site: http://www.northerngateway.ca/

This is of course Enbridge’s site to market its proposed pipeline.

By their own words:

Liquid pipeline spills along rights of way have decreased over the past decade, in terms of both the number of spills and the amount of product spilled. On average, for every barrel of oil (42 gallons) shipped 1,000 miles, less than one teaspoon is lost from a liquid pipeline.

Converting to metric, that’s 1,609 km. They plan to transport 525,000 barrels of tarsands oil a day to the West coast from Edmonton, along a 1,177 km pipeline.

So let’s say “less than one teaspoon” is 0.9 tsp, or 4.5 mL.  Multiply that by 1,177 / 1,609, and that’s 3.29 mL of oil spilled for each barrel shipped along the Northern Gateway pipeline.  Multiply that by 525,000 barrels a day.  That’s 1,727,250 mL of oil spill per day.  To make that easier to understand, that’s 1,727.25 L of oil spilled every day out of this pipeline. Every day.  That’s 630,446.25 L of oil spill per year, spread out over Northern Alberta and BC.

And that’s on average.  There’s no particular reason to think this pipeline will have more or less spillage, other than the fact that large parts of it will run through mountains. Even if they can engineer their way through the mountains without hurting the integrity of the line, if a spill does occur it could take a long time to get to the affected area to fix it.  Oh, and it’s not like Enbridge has a good track records with these things.  It’s risky.

But even without adjusting for that, it’s a lot of petroleum all over our landscape.  This is why I oppose the pipeline.

I’ve attached my letter.

Letter to Vic Toews

Here was the first post, which I think is worth sharing here too:

The Conservative Party of Canada was elected to a majority government in May of 2011 with 39.62% of the popular vote.  While the nature of our electoral system means their actions are legitimate and democratic, we’re pretty sure there are at least some CPC MPs and voters who aren’t happy.

Small-g green Conservatives must know the government’s support of the tarsands and pipeline projects, and branding of those opposed to these as “radicals,” is counterproductive.

“Small government” Conservatives and libertarian-Conservatives who support the party on eliminating the long-form census and long-gun registry are surely taking issue with the privacy-invading measures in Bill C-30.

Conservatives who support finding efficiencies in government spending must take offense to the wasted tax dollars being spent on helicopters for Peter MacKay and glowsticks for Toronto police officers.

There are so many other policies and bills coming forward or in the process now that are sure to irritate one faction or another in the Conservative Party of Canada.

The Westminster system means that Canadians elect MPs. Those MPs are members of parties, but there is no requirement that MPs always vote the same way as their party – unless the party forces them to through a whipped vote.  Conservative MPs who are unhappy with their party’s policies have a choice.  They can vote against their party. And if the party forces a whipped vote, they can choose to leave the party.

So we’re encouraging CPC MPs to do one or more of the following:

• Defy the party whip. Stand up on behalf of your constituents in opposition to the parts of your party’s actions that you disagree with.
• Leave the party and sit as an independent MP, so you are no longer forced to vote in support of issues you disagree with.
• Leave the party and join another political party, if you feel it better aligns itself with your views.
• Speak up in caucus against your leaders. You are elected representatives and it is your role to challenge your party leaders and participate in the democratic processes.

It only takes 12 Conservative Party of Canada MPs to vote against or leave their party to change things.  There are 308 seats in the House of Commons, 165 of which are held by Conservatives, one of whom is the speaker and only votes in a tie situation.  That would leave the CPC with only 153 votes of 307.

Of course, the more MPs that can be convinced to change their minds, the better. The one independent is a former Conservative who left the party to avoid embarrassing it and will likely vote with the CPC on most issues, so on any given vote more opposition may be required.

What can I do?

If you live in a Conservative riding, or even if you don’t, email your MP and other Conservative Party of Canada MPs telling them how you feel. Point out to them the inconsistencies in their government’s policies and why you feel they should oppose their actions.  Show them that their party is not doing what’s best for them and their constituents, and convince them that they can make a positive change before it’s too late!

I made reservations to spend two nights in Whistler for a mini getaway. I booked into the Lost Lake Lodge using the Whistler resort reservations page. The lodge is near the top of the road that leads into the Upper Village, which is not that far from the main part of the resort but mostly uphill on an icy road with no sidewalk. Fortunately there’s a bus.

Which provides this with a bit of a back story. Yesterday I went online to figure out exactly how I was getting to the hotel. Multiple websites, including that of the accommodation and that of the resort, reference a “free shuttle bus.” None of them provide information on where or when this bus runs. Some also mention other local transit options and point to the BC Transit website. The BC Transit site, in turn, makes no reference to any of its services in Whistler being free. If you figure out to open the PDF version of the route map of bus #5 or #4, then you will see mentioned in the title that they’re free. This info took me an hour or more to assemble last night.

So I arrived in Whistler today knowing where my accommodation was and how to get there. That part was surprisingly easy – it was about a five minute walk from the Greyhound stop to the #5 bus stop, and a five minute ride from there to the Lost Lake Lodge.

EDIT: I almost forgot it wasn’t as easy as all that. There are no stop announcements on the bus so you either need to ask the driver to announce for you or follow along on your GPS. I chose the latter fortunately without incident.

That’s when it all went horribly wrong. I got to the door (with, I might add, a small suitcase, a backpack, and a ski bag) and encountered a sign saying I had to check in at Blackcomb Lodge and giving an address. I didn’t think to note the address as I didn’t think that would be a hard thing to find. I was also distracted from doing so by some guys out on their patio adjacent to the front entrance who basically told me what the sign said. At some point in all of this I lost a glove.

So I headed back for the bus stop knowing it was the only way to get anywhere, and I missed the bus by about ten seconds. So I waited in the cold and rain for ten or fifteen minutes for the next one.

In the meantime, I entered Blackcomb Lodge into Google Maps on iPhone and it gave me transit directions to 4809 Spearhead Drive, just down the hill. It seemed reasonable that this would be where one would check in given its proximity to the Lodge.

So I followed these directions. And ended up at the Marquise hotel. At 4809 Spearhead Drive. Not sure what Google was thinking.

At this point I was frustrated and cold and starting to get angry. I found Blackcomb Lodge’s website and tried to find its address. It is nowhere to be found on their site. I tried searching on the Whistler site and it offered a map that is completely unviewable on iPhone. None of this was assisted by the fact that Whistler resort runs a facility called “Blackcomb Day Lodge” at the base of Blackcomb Mountain.

I eventually found a phone number and called it. After I explained I didn’t have a car they started to give walking directions. Remember at this point I’m still on foot, still half way up the icy hill with no sidewalks, and still carrying my stuff. Oh, and now it’s dark. After she got about half way there it became apparent how impractical walking directions would be and she eventually started to describe where Blackcomb Lodge was. It was near the taxi loop, which is the exact spot I got off the Greyhound bus an hour earlier. Yes, it had now been an hour.

I finally got the next bus back to the village (for some reason the bus normally runs every 10-15 minutes but there’s a 20-minute gap in the schedule right when I needed it again, and it has started raining… Ugh). I got to the “checkin centre” which is built into the Whistler information centre, and was told “that’s [gesturing at a closed and gated desk] where you would normally check in…” at which point I almost broke down into tears.

Fortunately the other place to check in was inside Blackcomb Lodge itself. And the lodge was next door. I got to the desk where the reception was sympathetic but rather unsurprised by my ordeal. I checked in, got my key and, after pointing out the fact that I just signed something saying I would use the ski lockers provided but hadn’t been provided a locker assignment, got a locker combination.

At this point I was tired and cold and hungry so I took a $10 cab back to the lodge since there were plenty of them waiting out front. Two hours after arriving on the Greyhound, I got into my room.

And that is why Whistler is not friendly to those who choose not to drive.

And it’s occurred to me over the last few weeks that I’ve spent the last three months dwelling on the past. Not in a particularly bad way, but looking backwards can eventually get kind of monotonous.  I don’t feel like I’m really ‘living’ here in Vancouver yet, it’s like I’m in a sort of purgatory, on pause between one place and the next.

When I first arrived here, after the obligatory stuff getting set up (furniture, hooking up utilities, etc), I dove right into catching up on work I had fallen behind on after two months of travel.

From there, I spent a whole lot of time uploading photos from my trip to New Zealand. Which was wonderful, but even at that point the photos were over a month old.

Then I dedicated a lot of my spare time to writing my belated travel blogs covering the span of the last year… as well as editing, updating, and posting my Canadian-in-Australia posts.

Almost immediately after that, all my stuff arrived from my storage unit in Oakville, sending me right back into dealing with the past — in this case, stuff that was at least one year in the past, though in many instances many years in the past.  I kept a lot of old useless shit.

By the time I finished digging through the worst of that pile (and fighting an incredibly nasty flu), I was on a plane back to Ontario.  To visit people who are slowly becoming people of my past (though, through the magic of the Internet, they thankfully remain a prominent part of my present as well).  And while out there I spent a full day digging through boxes in my parents’ basement — boxes of stuff I have in most cases not looked at in about a decade.  Including school notes dating back to grade 3.  This cemented my realisation of having a hoarder problem – but thankfully I was comfortable enough to dispose of virtually all of it.

And then I got back to Vancouver and, after briefly catching up from being away, dug right back into scanning old photos.  I’ve spent the last few weeks on nightly efforts to scan a total of 19 albums full of photos.  I had long since realised I was preserving the images and didn’t need the paper to do so, so scanning them and disposing of them was appropriate (though i shudder to think of the incredible amount of waste involved — I’m certain I’ve filled multiple recycle bins of paper (I had other stuff besides photos in these albums, as well as envelopes containing other photos as well as negatives) and at least 7 or 8 kitchen bags full of photos, negatives, and now-useless albums have all ended up in the garbage.

It’s been a wonderful trip down memory lane.  But it’s been all too long.  While I still have a bit of lingering tidying to do, I now feel like I’m moved in.  I finally live here. And look forward to taking in more of the city.  Which given today’s wonderful weather, is an exciting thought.

The Back Story: The HMV on Robson Street is going out of business. Today is their last day.  I went in back in December and they had signs up saying they were selling off their furniture, and to enquire about it.  I did, and bought and paid for a CD/DVD “end cap” shelf that was originally used back when this store was a Virgin Megastore.  It was still in use at the time so, long story short, I went to pick it up today.

I had been told by the manager at the time that the easiest place to put a vehicle was the laneway off Robson.  I rented a Zipcar and drove there, pulling into the laneway and finding very few spots to park as there were already three other vehicles parked there.  I turned the corner to the laneway that opens onto Burrard and found it empty, save for a few very large signs reading “Fire lane! Do not park!” or something to that effect.  Not wanting to disobey those signs, I turned back and found a spot in the laneway I came in on.

I went into the store, and after a couple minutes of figuring out the best approach and ensuring everything was in order, I headed out of the store along with an employee who was kind enough to help lift the shelf out to the vehicle for me (it was surprisingly light, fortunately, so getting it out of the vehicle at my apartment was no issue afterwards).  I came out to discover my vehicle being connected to a tow truck with Busters Towing decals all over it (and some other legal name printed on the side… I stupidly didn’t note this or the license plate down).  I said to him “that’s mine!”  He said okay, and that I’d have to pay him half of the towing fee ($45, he said, though ultimately the invoice actually said $42.64) and if I’d be so kind as to pay him in cash that would be great.

At this point I paused and had a “what the fuck?” moment.  I also noticed, for the first time, the small sign (at least, relative to the ones in the other laneway) that read “no parking” behind where I had parked.  It was clearly not a City of Vancouver sign, but based on the ticket I was issued it was obviously just reminding people of a general rule I didn’t know about to begin with, being “no stopping on either side of a lane which abuts commercially used property.”  Which, given the width of this laneway easily allows 2-3 vehicles to pass one another, is a pretty stupid rule.  But I digress.

Since this guy was asking me to hand over my own cash in exchange for not being towed, I challenged him and asked who he was.  He said he worked for the city, which I asked him to prove, since the words “Busters Towing” were all over his vehicle and his uniform.  He refused to provide any evidence, and merely pointed to the ticket that was on my windshield.  I’m not clear where the ticket came from, to be honest, as it was somehow issued in the five minutes or so I was inside the store – I suspect this company has been subcontracted not only to do towing but also to issue tickets and that he himself issued the ticket.  After I challenged the fact that he clearly did not work directly for the city, he said that the city issued the ticket and that he was hired by them to do the towing.

He then asked if I was going to pay. I told him I would happily pay the city (I had at this point realised I clearly made an error in parking there) but I wasn’t going to pay him, because really, who the fuck was he?  He then, without another word to explain what the fuck he was doing, continued to hook up the vehicle to his tow truck.  I asked what he was doing, and he said “you don’t pay, I take your car.”  At this point, realising I was essentially dealing with extortion, I said I was calling the city to find out who he was and whether he was authorised to do so.  A legitimate request, right? As far I know, this guy is some private business owner who is stealing my vehicle, and refused to prove otherwise.  After that didn’t delay him (he muttered something about wasting my time), he insisted again that I should pay him.

I told him I wanted a receipt, showed him I only had $10 cash on me, and asked if he would take a credit card. He would, thankfully (in retrospect, I should have demanded this to begin with, as now he has to pay the credit card fee and it also wasted a lot of his time in having to call in the number), and processed it and released my vehicle, proceeding to the next vehicle behind me to try to tow it.  There were, at this point, still three other vehicles behind me that had all been there longer than I had.

I’m not challenging the fact that I deserved a ticket – ignorance of the law is no excuse, and while I think that this particular rule is really stupid (why have laneways if they can’t be used for loading/unloading vehicles?), there’s nothing I can do about it.

I’m also not even challenging the ability of the city to tow vehicles parked illegally on city property, which was clearly the case here.

I’m challenging the fact that the city has essentially issued a license to a private company to take people’s money and to enforce by-laws as it sees fit.  In particular, what I find offensive about this is:

• The fact that the private company refuses to provide any evidence that it is authorised to engage in towing on the city’s behalf.  As far as I knew (though a quick Google search suggests they are in fact contracted by the city) this guy was stealing my vehicle.  He had no evidence of any connections to the city of Vancouver, nor was he even willing to provide any, or await confirmation via 3-1-1 (who I eventually called while I was waiting for him to process my credit card, but waited on hold so long the whole thing was over before I even got through to anyone).
• If the purpose of towing vehicles is to remove them from the offensive sites (I can’t think of any other purpose from the city’s perspective, though clearly the purpose on the part of Busters Towing is to make money), then there is no reason that a vehicle should be towed if its owner is physically present and willing to remove it.
• No one should ever be forced to pay cash (or credit) immediately upon receiving a ticket, and in particular no one should ever be forced to pay money to a private company for any reason.  I get that by-laws are not the same as criminal laws, but the basic principles of our legal system suggest the right to a fair process.  Having to pay a company to NOT tow your vehicle is absolutely absurd, and in my view amounts to extortion.  I’m not even sure if this act was legal, but if it was then I’m strongly of the view that it should not be.  The by-law violation ticket is fully enforceable, so there’s no reason they should still need to tow the vehicle.
• The goals of private towing companies and goals of the city are in this case completely at odds.  The goal of the city is to enforce its laws and to ensure the laneways are kept clear (I’m still not clear on why, but whatever).  The goal of the towing company is to make money.  It took far more time to stand there and have my credit card processed (and would also have taken far more time for him to continue hooking up my vehicle had that route happened) than it would have for me to get in the vehicle and drive away.  If the purpose of these rules is to keep the laneway clear, they are not working as they are supposed to under this arrangement.  The process should simply allow people to drive off, and be forced to pay the city’s fine – repossession of private vehicles will not help accomplish this goal, but will help the private companies make money, which is what puts them at odds.

I’m trying to decide who to send this to.  City councillors? Someone administrative at the city?  Please make suggestions in the comments.  I fully plan to pay the $50 fine, but really don’t think there’s any justification for having paid the “release fee” as the invoice from Busters calls it.  I’m tempted to challenge it with the credit card company as being a charge made under duress but wonder if there are any grounds for doing so.  I would love to hear people’s thoughts.

Here’s an excerpt:

A New York City subway train holds 1,200 people. This blog was viewed about 5,200 times in 2011. If it were a NYC subway train, it would take about 4 trips to carry that many people.

Click here to see the complete report.

First is my ‘Canadian-experience-in-Australia’ series with posts sharing my observations on Australia and in many cases how it compares to Canada, and what we could all learn from each other.  These posts are:

On standards…

Development

On Internet services

On governmental and electoral systems

Democratising Canada’s Senate

Bicycling infrastructure

On Pride events…

On mobile phone services in Canada and Australia

On pedestrian infrastructure & culture

On Public Transit / Public Transport

On Drug Policy

On Consumer Banking and Finance

On Commerce and Nightlife

Weather / climate (Canadian in Australia series)

No Worries, Mate!

On environmental action

The loose ends – tips for Canadians visiting / moving to Australia

And then there are the travel blogs I wrote up after the fact. They are:

The Travel Blog That Wasn’t – Australia part 1 (to November 2010)

The Travel Blog That Wasn’t – Australia part 2 (December 2010)

The Travel Blog That Wasn’t – Australia part 3 (January 2011)

The Travel Blog That Wasn’t – Australia part 4 (early February 2011)

The Travel Blog That Wasn’t – Australia part 5 (February/March 2011)

The Travel Blog That Wasn’t – Australia part 6 (April 2011)

The Travel Blog That Wasn’t – Australia part 7 (May 2011)

The Travel Blog That Wasn’t – Australia part 8 (July-early August 2011)

The Travel Blog That Wasn’t – Australia part 9 (August-September 2011) – The End.

New Zealand – the travel blog that wasn’t

As my time in Sydney drew to a close I spent the spare time I had (when I wasn’t working) just roaming its streets.  Sydney is just so majestic, there’s always something beautiful in front of you or just around the corner.  It was hard to let go, as I went on about awkwardly in another blog entry.

When I’d had a long day (which was often) and needed to just get outside, I’d head to Mrs Macquarie’s Point, a short walk from my apartment, and just sit there and breathe in the city and its lights.  This would also often lead to a walk to a 7-Eleven for a Slurpee, an addiction I developed while there!  I loved these walks — there’s something about being in a city at night that gives you a real feel for it.  Plus, there’s the wildlife:

As workloads started to lighten, and the weather started to warm (another major benefit of living in the Southern hemisphere was the way these two things lined up), I went on more of these walks and found myself in unexpected places in parts of the city I thought I knew really well.  I discovered a “Big Dig” archaeological site in The Rocks that I didn’t even know existed.  And just enjoyed hanging out.

I got one last day trip in – I spent the day (well, a day and a half) with Damien out in the Blue Mountains area.  This is about as mountainous as Australia gets, but it’s quite lovely – even the kitschy ScenicWorld tourist park they’ve set up. And it was nice to have one last chance to hang out with Damien, who was out of town when I left.

September also brought the arrival of a Twitter-friend (Duane, mutual friends with many of my Toronto friends), coming to Australia for a year or so, and it was nice to meet up with a Canadian who was in the same position (roughly) as I had been a year earlier.  There was an interesting moment in one of our SMS conversations when I realised I was no longer ‘new’ to Australia.  I suggested we meet at The Beresford, to which he responded “Is Beresford part of a hotel?”  It actually took me a couple of minutes to figure it out — The Beresford Hotel is the name of the bar/pub… a lot of pubs in Australia are named “Hotel” as at one point in history hotels were the only licensed establishments (and even today many of them theoretically offer rooms for the night)… but of course in Canada when something is labelled “hotel” it’s only an accommodation, and if it happens to have a bar the bar usually has a different name.  Anyways – it was great getting to know Duane while we were both in the same city!

My last few weeks were spent tidying up loose ends, dealing with early-morning apartment showings, going to the Margaret Cho performance at the Opera House (my last show there, which was a bit of a downer), getting a few last visits in with my Sydney friends, checking out the labour unions’ protest against NSW austerity measures, and more of those wonderful walks around town.  One of those walks landed me at the Chinese Gardens which were an unexpected treasure!  I also got to play laser tag (for the first time in years) with Josh and some of his friends which was tonnes of fun!

I moved out of my apartment in Woolloomooloo a couple days before my flight — I’d planned this to avoid any last-minute hassles.  I booked myself into Blue Hotel on the Woolloomooloo wharf – a super-fancy (but not as expensive as you might think) hotel that had always been so imposing while I’d been there.  I decided that, having never spent an evening on the wharf (since the restaurants are fancy/expensive and the hotel even more so), this was my chance.  Josh and I had a delightful dinner at one of the fancy restaurants on the wharf with a view of the ever-gorgeous sunset and went for a nice walk out to Mrs Macquarie’s Point.  Such a bittersweet night – it was so wonderful to spend that time together and have such a nice evening, but it’s the last time we’ve seen one another.  I miss him.  And hope to see him again soon.

I decided to spent my last full day in the city just taking it all in.  I had lunch at my favourite Mexican place in Potts Point (Tomatillo), and then I just walked. And walked. And walked.  I spent the whole day wandering all my regular haunts (except the Inner West – I wish I’d had time to get out there on my last day too) and just taking in the city while I still had the chance.  I took pictures along the way, which start here on Flickr.  From Potts Point I walked up to Darlinghurst (stopping for a soy flat white on Victoria Street along the way), then along Oxford Street through Hyde Park to the CBD, along Pitt Street Mall, past the QVB and Town Hall, through Darling Harbour, back around Barangaroo (which had become a bit of a favourite of mine – if I’d owned a bike I’d've been there all the time!), under the bridge to Circular Quay, up onto the Cahill Walk and back down into the Royal Botanic Gardens, and back over to the Opera House in time for sunset.

From there I headed back to Woolloomooloo to have one last meal at Harry’s, and headed over to Mrs Macquarie’s Point for some time to reflect on things.  There were supposed to be fireworks over Farm Cove that night but they didn’t materialise, so I wandered back South towards the city, just in time to catch some going off over Potts Point in what could only be described as perfect timing.  I spent a little longer wandering some of the busy night areas (like Oxford and George Streets), decided against going out for the night, and had a quiet night in, alone with my thoughts.

I left Sydney the next morning with a heavy heart.