Update March 2016- Here is an excerpt from some communications I received lately about Clarke and Andy Lehrer
I very much doubt that there will be many in attendance but I am sure that Lehrer will try to bring a few of his old CKLN cronies and there are a few people who are against him and his old CKLN gang who are trying to get people out to counter them. He doesn't have a following anymore.
Did you know that Lehrer was one of the first OCAP members before he and John Clarke had a falling out? That was discussed by Owen Leach at one of the CKLN meetings that Geordie Dent supervised as an "impartial moderator" though he is a friend of Lehrer's.
Rumour, and it is only rumour, that John Clarke wants to retire if only he could get a union to give him a pension, but another factor is that he is worried that Lehrer may want to step in to fill his shoes when he goes. It's only Clarke's iron grip on OCAP that is keeping Lehrer out. With Mark Brill, Graham Bacque, Liisa Schofield, Tim Groves, Kathy Holliday and Ken Nebone among other OCAP members being big Lehrer supporters it does seem possible.
But why would any union give Clarke a pension while as long as he heads OCAP he gets his unpaid followers to walk the picket lines when they don't have enough bodies like in the pickets they had against Porter Airlines. I assume that Clarke does this in return for union funding but if they do you can bet Clarke doesn't share any of that money with most of the poor people he gets to freeze their asses off walking those picket lines at this urging.
Founder of Ontario Coalition Against Poverty using the poor as cannon fodder in his battles with the police
My reply after Clarke started a show trial to drum me out of his
organisation. It is interesting that he is and his cronies are supposed to be super radical anti-poverty
activists, but have all these connections to poverty pimps type groups with government funding.
An article from Toronto free press from the last century. Keep in mind that this publication is very right wing. But what it has to say is valid, except that I do not have a problem with beseiging politicians who have no problem with violating the privacy of poor people. I would also like to know who appointed Clarke and freinds as crusaders in defence of the impoverished. The vast majority of such people want nothing to do with them. http://www.canadafreepress.com/1999/9901a2.htm