Canadian Priorities Part 1

The enthusiasm that Barack Obama gathered during the 2008 political election was fueled by a sense a excitement, the possibility of something new and bold, the chance to address problems that had lingered, unattended and unsolved. Not being the most ardent Obama supporter, all I can say is that he did mostly live up to his promise on the domestic front. The US came closer to universal health coverage, the rights of gays and lesbians were advanced, he tried to build bridges across political divides. Many Canadians were jealous during the 2008 election. What would a Canadian Obama do? Perhaps more importantly, what would a Canadian Obama promise? Our most recent federal election was disappointing. None of the parties offered platforms that promised to prepare Canada to face the challenges of the coming decade. The Bloc did not update its primary policy of a sovereign Quebec (Bernard Landry has pointed out that with the recent election of a minority PQ government in Quebec this is an evergreen belief). The NDP played politics and succesfully stole lefty voters from the Liberals by attacking the official opposition and not the ruling party. The Conservative party falsely took credit for the relatively healthy Canadian economy, healthy because of banking regulations they previously opposed. The main initiatives the Conservatives had revolved around jets and jails, not exactly a genius agenda. So what do I think a Canadian campaign of Hope would contain? It would address issues that have lingered too long and must be solved. It prepare us for the decades ahead. These issues are largely domestic. Canada's foreign policy has been abysmal recently, driven by attempts to win votes, but that doesn't really matter. We need to look in first before we can look out and all that stuff. So here it is, the issues that must be addressed 1. National Energy Policy: We need a national energy policy. Alison Redford thinks so, the CEO of Dutch Shell thinks so, everyone except Harper thinks so. To ignore or dismiss the fact that climate change is occurring and that it is occurring because of human activity, namely increased CO2 emission is highly irresponsible. We need to decide how CO2 is going to be managed. We need independent study of how environmentally damaging the oil sands are. We need a coordinated effort to transport oil and gas to new customers that is respectful to all those impacted by the industry. How are we going to pursue non carbon based energy. There is much to gain. By managing CO2 emissions by a cap and trade system or a carbon price we are simply preparing our industries for the future. The development of cleaner processing and carbon storage technologies will grow and diversify our economy. Knowledge about the environmental impact of the oil sands will allow Canada to defend the resource to international bodies such as the EU and will teach us how to extract oil in a cleaner way. The coordination of oil and gas transport entails not only getting everyone to agree to a pipeline route, it means deciding what form of oil and gas we are going to transport. The government should decide and should fund the development of refineries and processing plants in provinces that do not have extraction facilities. Why not build a refinery in BC to create jobs and share wealth from oil shipped from Alberta. Finally, we need to look beyond oil and gas to other forms of energy. The government should fund more research into solar panels, longer lasting batteries, all the things that will grow a knowledge economy while improving the processes of the traditional economy. 2. Aboriginal and First Nations Issues: That this isn't a top issue every election is criminal. The plight of First Nations people in Canada is unacceptable. They have higher rates of chronic disease, higher rates of poverty, higher rates of incarceration. All policies to date have failed. Aboriginal leaders and top government leaders need to meet regularly. Issues should be tackled one at a time, i.e., diabetes in Northern Manitoba. Pilot projects that are evidence based should be enacted. Land claims need to be solved in a timely manner. This problem is very difficult. Much of the problem is due to the standard sources of social inequity, namely, racism and a social structure that resists upward movement by some of its members. That being said, we haven't tried hard enough. 3. Unions and Benefits: Surprised this made the list. Me too. But really this could read "economy." North America is facing an unprecedented challenge to its workforce because of the growth of off shore manufacturing. Furthermore, the benefits and comforts enjoyed by previous generations of workers are now becoming out of reach of our current workforce. Any government faces a challenge by meddling with the labour market. So far governments, Ontario and Harper's feds, have largely intervened to strip unions of their right to strike and in some cases have legislated new contracts. This represents a profound lack of faith in the market. No one knows what is sustainable in terms of benefits and wages in the marketplace. Negotiated solutions should be sought where ever possible. Certainly, workers cannot expect the moon in trying economic times but running high profits while paying workers a pittance does not strengthen our country. Their are recent examples of both (overcompensated workers: TTC, greedy management: Caterpillar). Coming up in part 2: 4. Eliminating Oligarchy in Canadian Marketplace 5. Tackling Health Care in an Aging Population 6. Improving the Democratic Process

Friedman would miss the point in a point factory

I have really been making an effort not to get too riled by Tom Friedman, to try to listen to him, to see why he has a job at the New York Times when reporters all over the world cannot find gainful employment. I can no longer see any reason.

His most recent piece (which does not allow comments on the nytimes website) is at http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/29/opinion/29friedman.html. Here Friedman claims there is a "Narrative" at work against America. Worse it has worked to convince even American born and raised Muslims like Nidal Malik Hasan to join jihad.

This is crazy. This piece is criminal. Friedman completely discounts legitimate grievances the Muslim world has with America then spreads fear about Muslims abroad and at home. The same type of racism Daniel Pipes has tried to forward in America and groups like the Stop Islamification of Europe have pushed on the other side of the Atlantic.

Friedman says that for the last 20 years America has been dedicated to the plight of Muslims. Really? Really! Really? His examples, the Iraq war um okay, you have really got me on that one, how exactly have any of America's policies helped muslims in Iraq. Another example Darfur. What exactly did America do in Darfur? Another example Lebanon. I guess when America supplied weapons for Israel to blow up apartment buildings in 2006 that helped Muslims. Next example, Kurdistan. Oh so when America sold Saddam Hussein chemical weapons to kill Kurds in Northern Iraq that was helpful. Next example, Kuwait. I presume his means Desert Storm when he says Kuwait. I think he is being a little naive if he thinks America liberated the Kuwaiti people first and the oilfields second.

Friedman challenges Muslims in the end of his article to prove that Islam is more than suicide bombers and jihadists. Unbelievable. How does he get away with writing this stuff. I challenge Friedman to prove that Judaism is more than land grabs and repression of refugees. I feel guilty just writing that last sentence. Where's Friedman's conscience? Has he never truly met any Muslims. Don't tell me he is just trying to show a firm hand or tough love.

To be honest, it's not that he is racist that bugs me. That's understandable. What is the most irritating is he just doesn't get it, but, he still writes for the Times.

Hand of Henry

Okay so as usual I am a little late to the comment party.

Item 1. Hand of Henry. Yes, Thierry Henry intentionally handled the ball. Yes, it was a monumental piece of cheating not just bad officiating. I think everyone (even Raymond Domenech) agrees with those points. But what should be done about it? Defintely there should be a replay. The fact that FIFA is refusing a replay proves they are an arrogant and out-of-touch organization. Discussion about the other form of replay, namely video replay, is unecessary. What is needed instead is more officials. The fact that one referee and two linesman are required to officiate a 90 minute game played on a soccer pitch is ridiculous. Michel Platini is right. There should be officials at either goal line. I would also add two more linesman.

Four more officials are the minimum number to adequately monitor a soccer game. The call that is consistently wrong in soccer is the offside call. This is not the linesman's fault. It is nearly impossible to get close offsides right more than half the time. One linesman, who is usually behind the play (how are they supposed to keep up with world class athletes) cannot simultaneously view both the moment a pass is struck and the position of one or more forward players. The calls that are most consistently controversial are those resulting in penalty kicks. An official on the goal line would lend huge amounts of assistance to the referees who are often hopeless wrong about decisions in the 18 yard box.

One of the great advantages of soccer is the clock is always running. Other than half-time, soccer is like life, it never stops. The constant flow of the ball and of time is one reason soccer is considered the beautiful game. Instituting video replay would kill this aspect.

Item 2. Richard Colvin's testimony. I haven't got a lot to say about Colvin's testimony other than the Tories ended up looking very guilty by launching personal attacks on Colvin and then coming up with ludicrous questions for him like "So you saw bruises and evidence of torture but you did actually see the torture occuring?" If the Government was so innocent they would have released the documents in question long ago.

More importantly, this may finally be an issue on which the Liberals can gain some traction. The other gold ticket issue for the Liberals was the whole Tory cheque scandal. The Liberals should have turned that into a huge deal especially in a country that prides itself on modesty.

The problem with the Liberals is one of leadership. Michael Ignatieff is not accessible. The liberals need to win votes in Hamilton and Orrilia, and London, and Huntsville, and Sault Ste. Marie. Nobody is reading the Rights of the Stranger there. Justin Trudeau has tried and failed to replicate Obama. He is Hope and Change on overdrive. He never comes across as an everyman. If only Ralph Goodale was better looking and from Ontario.

Item 3. El Clasico. Well I'm excited. I think Barca's going to win big but it should be a great game and a great atmosphere. I hope Arsenal sticks it to Chelsea.

Kanye West Conspiracy

I finally watched the Kanye West Taylor Swift thing on Youtube. The weird thing is that nobody seems that upset. THe other weird thing is that Universal music is the record company for both West and Swift. The further weird thing is that West apologizes on Leno which is on NBC which is part of NBC Universal. Seems like a big conspiracy. West and Swift get lots of publicity. Then West goes on Leno and helps him out with ratings on his new show. I thought of this on my own but realized other people must have too. Here's a link to someone who thought of it a month and a half ago. http://weirdlectures.com/?cat=17

Didn't see any soccer this weekend. I will try to write about something bigger next week.

Sad Day.

October 5th was a sad day. Barbara Stewart, a good friend of our family passed away. I have been thinking about her a lot and I wanted to use this blog (especially given the blog name) to remember her. I knew her best as my friend Malcolm's Mom. She also was very active in the Alberta and Canadian Autism Society. Two years ago, we were lucky enough to see her at our wedding. She is missed by us her in Ottawa. Our thoughts are with Neil, Bryce, Malcolm, and Matthew.

Elaboration

One point I failed to mention on my post on the Obama Nobel is that what I call Obama's greatest achievement, being the first Black President, is now largely unrecognized by Americans.  I think this is why most Americans feel Obama has done nothing to deserve the Peace Prize.  They believe that he should have achieved more abroad.  The Iraq and Afghan wars persist how can he win a Nobel.  Americans are less willing to recognize change within their own borders.  Perhaps they have not yet realized that racial divides remain in their society and inequality is still very real.

What many will probably counter to my point that Obama deserves the Nobel for being the first Black President is that Americans voted him in, they should win the prize, or that he stood on the shoulders of other social leaders to win the prize.  That is sort of true, but prizes are best awarded to leaders not entire movements.  Martin Luther Kings was not alone. Mandela did not act alone. They lead others who followed them and help achieve transformation.

I know whole organizations like MSF and the UN have been awarded in the past but these types of awards lack direction and come off unspecific and anemic. 

Later

 

Lots of things to catch up on.

I have a lot to say because I have been away for a while.

First off,  the big issue while I was gone was Obama winning the Nobel Peace Prize.  Like most people I went through various stages on this announcement.  At first I was horrified because I knew this could not be good for the domestic agenda that Obama is trying to push.  The Republicans will likely be able to rip him apart for the rest of his term as President for accepting the award.  I though the Norwegians who awarded Obama were being selfish and stupid.  Then I hanged my opinion. 

I still think it's excellent ammunition for the Republicans but I also think the Norwegians were quite just and very reasonable in awarding Obama.  The first justification for Obama's award is I think the weakest.  This is that he created a groundswell of hope throughout the world.  The second stronger argument is that achieved what was largely thought to be impossible.  He is a Black President.  Maybe people have forgotten the images of Americans crying on election day, the scores of people who said that they never thought they would live to see this day, or Obama's election day message: "Change has come to America."

It might be crass and unsophisticated but this is the best reason for Obama to win the Nobel Peace Prize.  For a good article on the Obama Peace Prize read Doug Saunders article in the Globe and Mail.  Saunders is smart and always has something interesting to say.  For a crap article on the Obama Peace Prize read Margaret Wente's tautology in the Globe and Mail. 

Despite the fact that Obama deserved the Peace Prize I believe that he missed a great opportunity by accepting the Prize.  This is not my opinion I stole it from Ross Douthat. I think Douthat is right.  Politically, the genius move would have been to turn down the prize.  The White House's argument that one doesn't turn down the Nobel Peace Prize is weird.  Why not turn down the Prize?  Declining the award would have handcuffed the Republicans.  Maybe the White House feared Republicans  would be able to use Obama's rejection of the award as a sign of weakness and self-doubt.  I think the Republicans would have trouble selling that.  Most AMericans would be impressed by a gracious rejection of the Prize. 

Okay Issue Number Two: Man City Vs Man U Game.  I didn't see it so I have no idea. All I can say is that Craig Bellamy is still underrated. 

Okay Issue Number Three: The Oilers. So far, the Oilers look like an eighth placed team.  Though in fairness the only game I have seen so far saw them without Souray or Staios.  Nevertheless, the Oilers desperately need a first line. Neither Hemsky nor Horcoff are superstars.  Ilya Kovalchuk's contract is up soon maybe they can get him for Hemsky and something else.  Horcoff's never leaving thanks to his fat contract.  Until the Oilers have a top line they are not going anywhere.

Okay Issue Number Four: The beach ball. What a joke! (adapted from the White Tiger).  Where was the ref on that.  There is no way in the world that goal should have counted.  That ref should be permanently relieved.  Nevertheless, Liverpool is awful without Torres or Stevie G.  I thought Benayoun might be able to take over the game but he was really crowded out by a tougher, stronger Sunderland side.  Too bad Sportsnet wasn't showing the Arsenal game.  My man RVP scored another barn burner of a goal.  I love the way he plays.  With the way LIverpool is playing,  the question of who Man City is going to replace in the top four has been solved.

Yet, Man City is not the only team knocking on the Champions League door.  Sunderland has put together a nice record and gave Man U a run for their money. Maybe there will be a greater number of top teams deposed than initially thought.