There is a Problem With Our Education System

Over the past decades there has been a social shift in society that has led to the trades being looked on as a lower or a lesser job than those requiring university or college training. What society forgot to realize is that these jobs are not lesser they are equal if not more vital than the jobs that require university training. It was not until there grew a lack of skilled tradespeople that people realized the vital role they play in making everyone’s standard of living possible. Not everyone is cut out to sit at a desk all day just as not everyone is cut out to operate a circular saw. It is unfortunate that it took a drastic shortage along with an eternal need to increase the statistics of students obtaining an OSSD to bring the governments attention the importance of tech courses and co-operative education. Along with their policy of no longer penalizing late assignments and lowering a students accountability and responsibility they have started to realize that tech courses and a rounded education may help students succeed. One of these steps in the right direction the other is a misguided attempt at decreasing the drop-out rate. I know at my high school tech courses were an integral part along with co-operative education in ensuring student success. Helping students excel above and beyond the bar one step at a time: teaching them life skills such as responsibility, work ethic and accountability should be the goal of our education system. Not lowering the bar to allow them to stumble over it.

Fiscal Situation

When the liberals left office they left the Conservatives a comfortable buffer of money encase there was an economic slowdown. In 2 years the Conservatives have managed to squander that surplus, giving tax cuts to wealthy, and cut funding to numerous programs. If the Conservative can manage to squander a surplus in a "booming" economic situation we had a few short years ago. What hope do we have during this economic uncertainty?

Leadership Review Needed

As I watched the results come in last night I could not help but feel nostalgic. Not in any positive sense of the word. It reminded me of the Charge of the Light Brigade. Outnumbered in financial aid, perceived leadership and communication in English there was only one conclusion. This election was the Conservatives to lose.

Many suspected from the beginning of this election campaign its ultimate result; it seemed all one could do is put up one hell of a fight, hope for the best and wait for the damage report to come in. The Liberal party was in disarray: fractured over leadership and policy. However, now that the election is over and we have tallied the results there is no time to waste. Liberals will have to regroup and soon. The longer the Liberals are in disarray the longer they will stay in opposition. For Harper knows he has no real opponent until than and knows the liberals will not risk another election till they are ready.

Politics is neither fair nor accommodating. It is a game that has no rules and many judges. Sometimes even with the best intentions the best policies and the better vision things do not go your way and there is nothing that can be done. Sacrifices have to be made for the betterment of the country. The fact that Stephane Dion could not communicate effectively to a majority of the voting public represents one of these cruel realities. Public perception wins elections. Nothing more nothing less, it is not your policies but how the public perceives your policies, not your character but your perceived character. It is not that Mr. Dion is a bad politician I have the fullest respect and admiration for his political abilities, the fact is that he is not a national leader, a national face of a party, as we saw in the results from last night. One of the most valuable attributes an individual can have is recognizing their strengths and their weaknesses so that they can apply themselves to the best of their ability where they can make the most meaningful contribution. It is not his fault it is the fact that politics is the result of perception and because of this cruel reality, sacrifices have to be made and one must adapt.

If the liberals wait till the spring to have a leadership review how long before a leader is decided. How long would this new leader have to appeal to the Canadian public? Is this fair to the new leader?

Minority is not a Majority

Polls suggest that today's result will be a minority government. In today's politics with its extreme partisanship and absolutes it seems that those who win a minority charge forward as if they had received one hundred percent of the vote. They claim they received a strong mandate from the citizens of the country to enact there exact platform. They seem to forget that in a minority parliament more than half of the ridings voted against you: voted for a totally different platform. When I went to school when my assignment got 34% of the teacher's vote I failed. A government must take this in to account. We are a country that prides ourselves on compromise and accommodation. If you want to one day win a majority you must earn the respect of the voters that did not vote for your platform in the last election by doing things for them. Canadians do not like to waste money on elections every 2 years. A minority government will not win their votes by bulldozing legislation past the opposition, threatening to call an election when they do not get their way. A majority of Canadians voted for that opposition. The opposition is the voice of the voters you want: listen to them. They may not have done everything right, however, they must have got something right if you still have a minority. If a government wishes to govern a country with the people’s interests in mind a government must compromise and respect the opposition: there is no more room for one extreme than another.

When will they admit inaction is not an option?

How long will it take for the Harper government to admit that there is financial instability in Canada as we watch Bay Street tumble again today. Yet, Harper continues to testify that the fundamentals of the economy are strong and the only action to be taken is inaction: steady as it goes, ride through the storm and all the other cliches. Every other political Party in this election has put forward a plan and a platform on the economy. Yet, the conservatives have yet to release their platform just over a week before election day and advanced poll already open. Granted they have set a date of tomorrow to release their election platform, however, it is unclear whether this is due to pressure brought to bear by the opposition parties during the national debates. The conservatives seem to believe that continuing to lower corporate tax is the only way to support economic growth, when will they come to understand that their current policies are not helping main street survive. They must invest in research and development, invest in industry that supply jobs close to home. It is proven that the only way research and development is the fundamental necessity to not only ensure that jobs are created in the future but furthermore to ensure a competitive economy on the world stage.

Taxes

(This is an older opinion piece and does not necessarily represent the views of the author but is intended to promote discussion on this issue)

There are few times in politics when all sides of the debate are satisfied with the actions of the other. Politics would not be politics without debate, differences of opinions, and compromise to provide the best solution (theoretically) for the people of the nation. As a federation, the dynamics of Canadian politics is divided between the partners of the federation and a centralized government to whom the responsibility of representing the partnership as a whole is presented to. The role of the Federal Government is to promote and represent ALL of Canada to the world as a place to invest and live. Furthermore, its responsibility includes dealing with problems and concerns that face the nation as a whole. Canada would not be Canada without its regional conflicts but it is not the role of the Federal government to interfere in the policies of an elected government of the province unless it affects the other partners in the federation or the problem is in federal jurisdiction. Recently, the Federal Finance Minister, Jim Flaherty, has forgotten his duty to represent and promote all of Canada when he criticized Ontario's Provincial government for not lowering their corporate tax rate. He publicly stated that if a business or individual were looking to invest in Canada, Ontario would be the last place they would invest. In a time of economic uncertainty it seems that now is not the time for the Federal Finance Minister to be attacking the economic climate of one member of the federation he represents to the world. He represents each partner in federation equally, not simply the partners that share his economic and or political beliefs. Ontario's tax rate maybe the highest of the provinces but it is still over 5% lower than the federal corporate tax and it is Ontario's own prerogative as a province to deem what tax is necessary to support this province. The federal government should not over step its jurisdiction let alone publicly discourage economic growth in a province. It is the role of the John Torry and the provincial MPPs of the Conservative Party to criticise along with the other provincial politicians. Mr. Flaertety does nothing except further estrange Ontario voters by attacking a government that has just won a majority in an election that took place less than a year ago. The Ontario Liberals say they could afford to lower taxes sooner if they did not have to pay off a deficient they inherited from Conservative governments: of which Mr. Flaherty was a Finance Minister at one time. If Mr. Flaherty wishes to be involved in provincial politics maybe he should return to his former job as an MPP. He is now a Minister in the Government of Canada which includes Ontario Canada by criticizing an elected provincial government in a matter of which he has no jurisdiction. and he does nothing to strengthen this federations we call Canada.

The Role of a Peacekeeper

(This is an older opinion piece and does not necessarily represent the views of the author but is intended to promote discussion on this issue)

Recently, with the continued instability around the globe, particularly in the Middle East, Canada, as a nation, has been debating what it truly means to be an international peacekeeper. Traditionally, it is the broad umbrella under which every military mission abroad the Canadian Forces has embarked on - since the establishment of the United Nations Peacekeeping Force by former Prime Minister Lester Pearson- has been classified under. Canadians and the rest of the world perceive Canada as a nation that has time and time again put its brave men and women in harms way to protect the peace of those who could not: whether in Egypt, Cyprus, Kosovo, Rwanda and currently in Afghanistan.

With increasing hostilities between Egyptian forces and the British and French forces that controlled the Suez Cannel, the international community established an international force to maintain peace. Consequently, the international force was credited with avoiding an armed conflict. Canada took a foremost role in establishing the force and has ever since been a leading nation in international peacekeeping.

Now Canada is pressed once more to decide if it will continue its operations in Afghanistan. A large section of Canadian citizens see their young men and women dying in a faraway land and say that this is not peacekeeping: peacekeeping does not and should not involve a Combat role. This initial fright is the one downfall of the popular definition of peacekeeping. This is not to say that peacekeeping requires a combat role: it is my strong believe that the fundamental success of peacekeeping historically has been that all forms of mediation and compromise have been attempted. However, when mediation does not work, when one side is unwilling to respect the rights of the other, when one side decides to answer the calls for compromise with lead, sometimes, a combat role is inevitable.

When entering the country with peacekeepers, that country is declaring that we are here to help you; are we helping them if all we do is talk the talk but do not walk the walk? We have seen the consequences when we talk the talk but do not give our troops the ability to walk the walk. Those who do not believe that peacekeepers should have the ability to defend, by force, those who do not have the ability to defend themselves have forgotten the horrors of Rwanda. Canada had peacekeepers on the ground but we did not give them the ability to protect the persecuted. Canadian peacekeepers watched as a genocide of unimaginable horror was committed: because their rules of engagement would not allow them to intervene. However, it seems that Canadians have forgotten or never learnt from the mistakes of Rwanda.

The current government has failed to inform the Canadian populous or even allow the Canadian populous to learn what our brave young men and woman are doing. They promised accountability yet they give us invisibility. They seem scared that if Canadians discovered what our soldiers are doing it will lead to stronger resistance to the mission. Yet, the other political parties say the price is too high, we should pull our troops out; capturing the momentum of the anti-war sentiment fostered by a portion of Canadian society that believes in isolationism and/or humanitarianism; however, they do not understand that they cannot promote isolationism and humanitarianism: as they are polar opposites.

They fall behind the sweeping generalization of "HOMES NOT BOMBS". Yet, it is impossible to provide the humanitarian aid they call for without first providing security; for they seem unaware that building a house, a school or a hospital in Afghanistan is not as simple as building on their lot in the Muskokas: in the heart of cottage country. For if they had trouble with vandals, looters or god forbid militants they simply call the police to maintain their security. They do not understand that as peacekeepers we are and should be the equivalent of police. Providing the security necessary until the country is able to provide its own security. Furthermore, we must provide the logistical and technical experience we have to help train their personal which will in turn decrease the time necessary to return the state’s ability to run autonomously.

There is sacrifice in helping a country to become autonomous; in entering Afghanistan Canada committed to rebuilding Afghanistan. Canadian soldiers are internationally renowned for the professionalism and courage: they did not sign up for the military simply for the dental plan. We must not be afraid of death. It is our soldiers job and duty, which they take great pride in, to complete the missions assigned to them by the government of Canada. Seventy-eight soldiers and one diplomat have sacrificed their lives for the mission. What did they die for if we do not complete the mission? Their sacrifices are in vain if the mission is not completed: they paid the ultimate price. Historically Canadians have never been scared of sacrifice for the betterment of our society and the international community; we must not become scared of sacrifice now by withdrawing our troops or by restricting them to watching idly, as they did in Kosovo.

When the first United Nations Forces casualties in Kosovo were reported almost every nation withdrew all forces from the area and a genocide was allowed to transpire. As the casualties in Afghanistan mount we must bear the brunt of the burden we undertook by accepting the mission. We must understand that in order to be effective peacekeepers, in order for our sacrifices to be made worth while, we must give our soldiers the ability to perform their duty, the ability to walk the walk. We cannot afford to become isolationists as the international community did after World War One: allowing Hitler free range before the international community finally realized they must stop him. We must learn from the mistakes of the past, learn from history, and help the people of Afghanistan rebuild their country for the betterment of all the international community. Canadian must remember that international peacekeeping is a duty that must have our full dedication if it is to succeed. It is our duty and obligation to completing the job that must be done. Peacekeeping takes more than simple mediation; but, also action if we are to make meaningful contributions to the state we are assisting.