Columnists

Jan 242013
 
A daycare centre.

UN Committee finds Canada shirks obligations under Rights of the Child.

by Jody Dallaire

Childcare has been a political flashpoint in Canada for decades, especially since 2006, when the incoming Conservatives canceled the proposed national childcare program and substituted a monthly family payment of $100 per child. Human Resources Minister Diane Finley caught flack for explaining that the Conservatives oppose any program that would “ensure that parents are forced to have other people raise their children.”  

Last October, the UN Committee on Rights of the Child called on Canada to provide free or affordable child care, as part of a report on its ten-year review of Canada’s efforts to comply with the Convention on Rights of the Child.  The Committee found Canada lacking, because of new punitive young offenders measures, inadequate services for aboriginal children and other minorities, and insufficient commitment to childcare.

Continue reading »

Jan 212013
 
US President Barack Obama is sworn in for a second term.

Barack Obama's second term will be as contentious as his first.

by Geoffrey Stevens

When Barack Obama takes the oath of office formally today, he may reflect on the reality that the job of being president is a good deal more complicated than it seemed in the euphoria of his first swearing-in four years ago.

Back then, he was a junior senator from Illinois who had propelled himself to the highest office in the land. "Who'd have thought that the war in Iraq would be the least of my worries?" he joked in a 60 Minutes interview that reviewed events in his first year, including  the meltdown on Wall Street and a global recession. He made climate change a priority, but wasn’t able to do anything significant about it. He tried to inject a measure of fairness into the tax code, but had to settle for a minuscule increase in taxes on the super-wealthy.

Continue reading »

Jan 172013
 

Advisory Committee report recommends guidelines and options.

by Jody Dallaire

Overall, 150,000 New Brunswickers (15 percent of full-time workers and 20 percent of part-time workers) do not have prescription drug insurance. Now  the NB Advisory Committee on Health Benefits has recommended that the province provide prescription drug insurance, on the same basis as other kinds of insurance. Everyone in the province would benefit, not just those 150,000. 

Continue reading »

Jan 162013
 

Other nations recognize Nature has rights; Canada can too.

By David Suzuki

Public health worker Beatriz Mendoza was living near the Riachuelo River in Buenos Aires, Argentina, when she started losing feeling in her fingers and toes. Her neighbours were also experiencing health issues – including skin rashes, cancers and birth defects – clearly linked to pollution in the heavily industrialized area. The Matanza-Riachuelo basin is one of the most contaminated waterways in Latin America.

Continue reading »

Jan 142013
 
RichardWagamese

Court adds 600,000 Indians to government responsibilities.

by Richard Wagamese

The Federal Court decision recognizing that Métis and non-status Indians in Canada are “Indians” under the Constitution Act had a lot of non-native Canadians scratching their heads. The question the ruling raised most was: What does it mean to be Indian in Canada today?

It’s a heady question, that will spark much debate and a likely appeal of that decision by the Harper government. The ruling could mean that Métis and non-status Indians are entitled to the same benefits as registered status Indians. Those benefits include some tax exemptions if living on a reserve, hunting and fishing rights, and some health and education benefits.

The new “Indians” inherit the same struggles, frustrations and denials their status brothers and sisters have endured for some 140 years.

But the issue is deeper than that, and goes way beyond a mere political grab bag of rights. It goes to the fundamental idea of Canada itself because, if the ruling stands, there will be 600,000 more Indians for the federal government to deal with. It means that the new “Indians” inherit the same struggles, frustrations and denials their status brothers and sisters have endured for some 140 years.

To be Indian in Canada today means that one signatory (to the nation-to-nation agreement that frames your life) forgets that it’s a treaty nation. Canada became a treaty nation when it sought to bring the Indians into treaty. It entrenched itself historically when it signed those documents. Unfortunately, the years since have been an ongoing process of denial of obligations and responsibilities under treaty.

To be Indian in Canada today is to see your children suffer. On reserves, in Métis communities and in the cities, aboriginal children go hungry, lack warm clothing and solid educational resources, die as infants at a rate two to four times the national average and endure immunization rates 20 times lower than the general population. They suffer because different orders of government dispute who’s responsible to pay or provide for a service.

To be Indian in Canada today is to see youth languish in chronic unemployment and malaise, and high rates of alcohol, drug and solvent abuse and suicide.

To be Indian in Canada today is to see youth languish in chronic unemployment and malaise, endure high rates of alcohol, drug and solvent abuse or die by suicide at a rate five to seven times higher than non-aboriginal youth. It is to see the future of your people fail to finish high school or get skills training; too often they become parents themselves at a frighteningly early age. This, despite Canada’s being a signatory to the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child.

To be Indian in Canada today is to know that your women are likely to be victimized, murdered or go missing. It’s to know that you may have to share a two-bedroom house with as many as 16 other people. It’s the understanding that running water is a luxury or clean drinking water a rarity. It’s the awareness that Canada has known about these grave issues for decades, but they still persist.

To be Indian in Canada today is to know that your people’s part in the history of Canada isn’t taught in schools. It’s to know that, when we speak of our treaty rights, most of the country doesn’t know what we speak of. It’s to hear your spiritual connection to the land referred to as nothing but a “romanticized attachment” by educated journalists. It’s to have your traditional role as a steward and protector of the land denounced summarily.

This is the reality that greets Canada’s new “Indians.” But there’s more. To be Indian in Canada today is to stand in solidarity and equality with brothers and sisters across the country to say that we won’t live this way any longer. It’s to be part of a movement of people that says we won’t idle any longer or wait for our chiefs to tell us when or where to move. It’s to seek to enlighten our non-native neighbours to the truth of who we are, our history, rights and what we want.

To be Indian in Canada is also to be part of a movement of people that says we won’t idle any longer or wait for our chiefs to tell us when or where to move.

To be Indian in Canada today is to watch our youth and our women take to the forefront of this direct action and lead. It’s to know that our future is secure so long as they continue to bring their energy and their vision to the attention of a nation that has never truly heard us before. It’s to be galvanized. It’s to be strong.

To be Indian in Canada today is to learn from history so it’s never repeated. It’s to turn to our elders and wise ones for guidance in turbulent times. It’s to be prayerful and gentle at the same time we are resolute and unwavering. It’s to be a spiritual warrior in a quest for the greatest good.

This is what awaits the new “Indians.” I say welcome.

Jan 132013
 
Kathleen Wynne.

 

Leadership candidates have yet to break a sweat. 

by Geoffray Stevens
 
This Ontario Liberal leadership contest is a curious affair.
 
You would think it would be an exciting, even thrilling competition. After all, the winner will become premier of Ontario, making her or him the second most powerful leader in the land, next to Prime Minister Harper.
 
Six candidates covet the job (down from seven with the withdrawal of Glen Murray last week). You would think they would be scrapping furiously as each tries to gain an edge, to demonstrate that he or she is the most competent, has the brightest ideas or the most compelling personality, and is the best bet to lead the Liberals back to the promised land of majority government.
 

With only two weeks to go, we have (at the risk of sounding uncharitable) six zombies sleepwalking to the finish line.

But where’s the excitement? Where’s the drama? The last time the Ontario Grits chose a leader, it was won by a candidate, Dalton McGuinty, who came from fourth place on the early ballots. Now that was exciting!
 
This time, with only two weeks to go, we have (at the risk of sounding uncharitable) six zombies sleepwalking to the finish line. The policy differences among them are so minuscule as be indiscernible.
 
If they bring any passion to their candidacies, they do a fine job of hiding it. If they possess any charisma, they are careful not to display it. If they would lead Ontario in a direction different from McGuinty’s, it is not apparent from their public utterances. 
 
You might think that after 17 years of McGuinty leadership, 10 of them in charge at Queen’s Park, the Liberals would be ready for something new, for someone who would appeal to all those Ontarians to have come of voting age since the Liberals last changed leaders in 1996 (when the youngest members of this year’s electorate were in diapers). 

Where are the 30-year-olds who burn with idealism and could inspire students on campuses across Ontario?

 
But no. Dalton McGuinty is 57 years old. The candidates to succeed him are all from his generation. They range in age from 50 (Sandra Pupatello) to 62 (Harinder Takhar).
 
Where are the 30-year-olds who burn with idealism and could inspire students on campuses across Ontario? Where, for that matter, are the energetic 40-year-olds with an urge to change the government and shake up the province? Why are they all AWOL?
 
Out there, somewhere, is a lost generation of Liberals. They may vote for the party, or they may not, but they not interested in the game of political leadership.
 
There are reasons, of course, for this limited interest. It’s not going to be a whole lot of fun being Liberal leader or premier in 2013. 
 
Whoever wins is going to have to face the mess at Queen’s Park where the Legislature has been prorogued since October. Prorogation hasn’t made the provincial deficit go away; it’s $14 billion and counting.
 
Nor has it made the opposition go away. The Progressive Conservatives and New Democrats still have voting control. No matter how accommodating the new leader may try to be, he or she will be a wounded deer in the opposition’s sights. They will bring the government down whenever it suits them.
 
The new leader will go into the election at the helm of a party that has lost its credibility to govern. That loss was evident in the 2011 election results, in the crucial Kitchener-Waterloo by-election last fall (when the NDP won and the Liberals ran third), and in the opinion polls that put the Tories first and the Liberals third or, at best, a weak second.
 

Insiders predict the new leader will be one of the two women candidates, either Kathleen Wynne, of Toronto, or Sandra Pupatello, from Windsor.

Insiders predict the new leader will be one of the two women candidates, either Kathleen Wynne, whose strength is in Toronto, or Sandra Pupatello, from Windsor, who is favoured by much of party establishment and by delegates from ROO (rest of Ontario).
It came down to that back in 1996 when the candidate from ROO (Ottawa’s McGuinty) won a fifth-ballot victory over Toronto’s Gerard Kennedy, who, yes, is running again, 17 years later.
 
Meanwhile, outsiders wonder how whoever wins this sleepwalking contest will be able to breathe new life into Ontario’s Liberals.
 
Jan 102013
 

Even Business Council decries cutting property tax revenues.

by Jody Dallaire
 
The New Brunswick government has sounded alarms about the provincial deficit. Yet its first actions include decreasing essential revenue, by cutting major corporations’ property taxes, unasked and against economists’ advice. 

Continue reading »

Jan 102013
 
Rebecca Tarbotton.

Rainforest Action Network executive director leaves inspiring legacy.

by David Suzuki

Last year ended on a sad note, with the accidental drowning death of Rebecca Tarbotton in Mexico, at 39 years of age. Becky was the inspirational executive director of San Francisco-based Rainforest Action Network, but her roots were in British Columbia.

Continue reading »

Jan 062013
 
JustinTrudeau

New leaders could jump start federal and provincial Liberal parties' revival.

by Geoffrey Stevens

The year 2013 promises to be a definitive year for Liberals in Canada as the memory of past glory collides with the hard reality of the present.

Canadian Liberalism use to be described as the most successful political movement in the Western democracies. Much of the reputation was earned by the federal Liberal party and its succession of governments in Ottawa, but some of it rubbed off on provincial Liberals, too.  That was in the olden days, the 20th century.

Continue reading »