Tuesday, October 31, 2006

University Students: More for Less

Once again, my fellow university students are fighting to get their tuition fees reduced. I do feel that we pay too much at the universities, but I'm starting to see the reasons why. University students are an interesting bunch. The South Park guys would say they like to smell their own farts. They're very smug. They think they're progressive and attentive to the issues. They're not. The issue of tuition fees has become all too black and white. These students should know better than to treat it like that.

The tuition debate has been raging for the past several years. In some fields, such as law, tuition has been increasing nearly exponentially. On average though, tuition increases this year were roughly between 1-6%. Dalton McGuinty followed through on an election promise to freeze fees for two years only. When the freeze was lifted, many students felt he had broken a promise. Though I do not like the man, he did not lie or break any promises in this case. The freeze was clearly stated to be for two years only, with caps of up to 6% after. Students still feel cheated.

Now here's the kicker. While students have been protesting the huge increases in tuition, they have also been demanding more on campus services. Services that cost money. Where I go, demands include 24 hour quiet study space, a more advanced gym, more money for clubs, and even child care services. In other words, they want to pay less money in tuition, but they want more money for other things. Often these demands are non-academic, related to what they call "campus life".
As an example, $5 is added to tuition for a dedicated fund to help purchase new books for the library. A poll of the student population held by the student council asked whether or not this money should be moved to fund clubs instead. I cannot remember the results of the vote, but I believe the student council's plan was voted in favour of transferring the funds. However, this was only a plebiscite, not a referendum. Only the university's administrators can make the final decision. I think this does show where the priorities are.
The more recent issue of child care at the universities has become a hot topic. The vast majority of students are aged 18-24. Staff members tend to range from 40-60. Most of the staff and students are outside of average child bearing age, which now is probably 25-35. The children of staff members tend to be old enough to look after themselves for short periods of time. So this begs the question, is child care really necessary. I think not. In four years, I've only met one student who had a young child. Universities should not be in the business of running such programs because they are such a financial drain. You have to hire day care workers and designate a room, buy toys and educational material. All that for a very small number of people. Likely, all students would be forced to share the burden of these services, rather than just those using them.

So who do these students want to pay for their new services? Ironically, themselves. Not in the form of tuition but in the form of higher taxes. They want tax payers to fork up the bill for their education. That would be a huge burden when government coffers are already stretched thin trying to pay for health care and primary & secondary educational services. There simply isn't enough money to have a "free" university system without having huge tax increases. I'm sorry my fellow students, but you're just going to have to buckle down, start saving, and stop wasting so much money on beer and parties. That's life, get used to it.
Besides, if university were "free", you can't honestly tell me you wouldn't take it for granted.
read more...

Thursday, October 26, 2006

The Trouble With Belinda

I'm glad I don't live in Newmarket/Aurora. Liberal MP Belinda Stronach controls this riding. She certainly is an interesting character in Canadian politics. She replaces Sheila Copps and Caroline Parish as the most controversial female in parliament. So who is Belinda Stronach? She's a business woman and heiress, her father owns auto parts giant Magna International. She was ran for the Conservative party leadership in 2003, loosing to Steven Harper. In 2004, she was elected as a Conservative MP for the Newmarket/Aurora riding in Ontario. Shortly there after, she engaged in a whirlwind romance with Conservative deputy leader Peter Mackay. She later dumped him, and the Conservatives and crossed the floor to the Liberals. She was re-elected as an MP in the same riding under the Liberal banner in early 2006 and continues to serve as an MP.

This week, she's back in the news after Mackay allegedly called her a dog in parliament. This was after a Liberal in opposition made a comment about Makay's actual dog. Stronach was not sitting in parliament at the time. No evidence of the infamous dog remark has been found on the record. Only Liberals claimed to have heard it. Somewhat disgustingly, it has dominated the news. Sometimes I wish Canada was more like the Republic of China, where they have first fights in their parliament. Issues with other MPs would certainly be solved faster that way.
This is not the first time Stronach has been in the news. She allegedly had a sexual relationship with hockey tough guy Tie Domi. She flatly denies this despite photographic proof existing to the contrary. Stronach had demanded an apology from MacKay over the dog comment.

Stronach herself is a political pawn. She knows this and plays it well. Her favorite defense is sexism. She only gets treated poorly simply because she is a woman. In reality, she is simply a poor little rich girl who knows how to manipulate people to get what she wants. The dog comment and the Domi incident only testify to her pawn role. However, this makes her a very ineffective leader. She simply does nothing other than play political games, and in reality stands nowhere on the issues. She would probably have joined the communist party without second thought if they offered her the same sweet deal that the Liberals did. The Liberals have carefully crafted the dog issue around her in order to make it appear that the Conservatives are anti-woman. They are in fact succeeding as female support has dropped sharply over the comment that many people in parliament weren't even sure was made. The Conservatives just the same played her in the Domi issue, attempting to destroy here credibility. When the next election comes, I highly recommend that Newmarket residents vote Stronach out on her backside, if only to put an end to the nonsense political games.
read more...

Wednesday, October 25, 2006

Garbage Now at Our Borders

Mexico is no longer the place for American criminals to pay a visit. Canada is now the new hot travel destination for those who are less than law-abiding. This week however has presented us with one of the strangest court rulings in US history. A Buffalo man charged with sex offenses convicted. In lieu of jail time, he proposed he spend his three year sentence in Canada with his family. The judge agreed.

Woah! Back the truck up here. A US judge actually banished a man and is putting their garbage on our doorstep? Well, it wouldn't be the first time since we get tons of pre-caught felons coming up here. However, can this Buffalo judge even legally do this?

The simple answer is black and white. No they cannot. Canada has full rights to refuse entry or remove anyone of another nationality who has committed criminal acts. I'm also pretty sure that even though this person was convicted of a crime, it's unconstitutional to kick an American citizen out of their own country. Unfortunately, this issue is not black and white. The judge made his ruling and it stands unless a higher court rules the decision to be irresponsible. So now the US and Canada are debating what to do with this man. The man is now stuck living it up in legal limbo with his family in St Cathrines. The Canadian government is deciding whether or not to deport him. They likely will deport the man because they don't want to create a legal precedent that would allow US judges to use Canada as a giant penal colony. The US is also stuck between a rock and a legal hard place because they would have to appeal the decision, which takes time.

The ideal thing to do would be to detain this man for deportation while the US goes through the process. However, we would need to seek assurance that the US would pay for his detainment. We also need an agreement that ensures that this mess will never happen again.
read more...

Don't Turf Turner, Turf Harper

I was very upset and disturbed by Halton MP Garth Turner being kicked out of the Conservative caucus. As I understood it, the Conservatives were going to give us a more US style government in which individual MPs were allowed to speak their minds. However, what we are getting is more Chrétien style attitude from the man in power. In other words, strong arming their MPs into line. Comments on Turuner's blog were cited for his removal from caucus. Turner is one of the only MPs who uses an electronic medium to talk to his constituents.

Former Hamilton MP Sheila Copps brought up an interesting point in this weeks Sun. She says that this move will backfire in Harper's face. Indeed it will for I will no longer be voting Conservative unless they apologize to Turner and reinstate his seat in caucus, and remove Harper as party leader. So far, Harper has been a disappointing leader, particularly to Progressive Conservative supporters like myself. He has given us a rather poor foreign policy coupled with more typical Liberal style antics on the home front.

The turfing of Turner however is just as much an institutional issue as it is a Conservative Party one. The fact that this would even be legal in a modern, western democracy is appalling. The Westminster system is simply too archaic to function effectively. Many people cite history as a reason not to change. However, history is a dialogue of change and change is what is needed. Canada must adopt a US style republic in which all sitting members in parliament are free to speak and vote as they choose. This system may be slower and has its flaws, but it is still more fair and balanced than the one Canada currently uses.
read more...

Pony Up The Dough Tonto

Wow, a lot to cover this week.

Well, it's been nearly a year since the start of the Caledonia land dispute, and it shows no sign of ending. A recent report has found that the province of Ontario has found that total cost of policing the dispute and buying the land could cost up to $55 million before the protest ends. Ontario wants at least $25 million from the feds to pay for it, since police don't work cheap. However, why should the Canadian tax payer even be on the hook for this at all?

This farce in Caledonia makes you question who is really running the country. A group of natives sell a plot of land to a housing developer, then decide they want it back but refuse to return the money. They claim they didn't understand the deal. Sure, and I'm the queen. They know exactly what they're getting into because the white man will bend over backwards for the Indian and even hand them the bottle of lube. They know how to play off the white guilt felt in todays PC age.

I propose that the Iroquois First Nation should be made to pay for the protest. Their scam backfired and they started this dispute. They are the ones harassing the people living in Caledonia. Canadians should not be forced to pay for their temper tantrum.
As I have already said, the whole way we deal with the country's native people needs to change. It is archaic, places a huge burden on Canadians, and keeps the native people backwards. I cite the huge success of many who have left the reserves to join the rest of the world, yet without giving up their roots. They obviously are not inferior. The first step to brining them out of the hole they've been buried in is make them responsible for their actions against the greater society. It's time to stop treating Canada's First Nations like children.
read more...

Friday, October 13, 2006

Unfab Five

Today, I'd thought I would look at the five leaders that are, or are claimed to be threatening world peace. Lets investigate the their threat to our country.

Osama Bin Laden
The Saltan of Terror, the king of Jihad. Osama (aka Usama) is a religious zealot bent on wreaking havoc where ever he goes. A typical spoiled rich kid, he has corrupted Islam to suit his own perverse hatred of the Western world. It is unclear why he does this.
Osama is directly responsible or inspired dozens of deadly terrorist attacks in the United States, United Kingdom, Iraq, Afghanistan, Indonesia, and several other countries. He has legions of followers who hold onto his every word. He and his followers do not fear god and they are not afraid to harm innocent people in order to achieve their goal of a fundamentalist Islamic world. In the process, he has put Islam against the rest of the world. Canada is on his hit list.

Threat to Canada: High
Likely Actions: Small to mid scale terror attack
Canadian Casualties: Up to 10000

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad:
The president of the Islamic Republic of Iran. He is driven by hatred and racism more than religion. Has stated he wants to wipe Israel off the map. His regime is fascist and Nazi-like. Current work if focused on developing a nuclear program. It is unknown whether or not this is for peaceful purposes or for war. Canada recognizes Israel's right to exist, and therefore puts us in opposition to Iran. Canada, however, is too far away and our military is busy elsewhere.

Threat to Canada: Low
Likely Actions: Nuclear attack on Israel, war with United States
Canadian Casualties: Likely none

Kim Jong Il:
Leader of the North Korean communist party and de facto ruler of the Democratic People's Republic of Korea. Kim Jong Il is viewed as a cartoonish super villain and mad man. He is in fact a smart politician who knows how to manipulate the world. He lives in a great palace while his people starve. His regime is Stalinist and almost Orwellian. North Koreans have little or no freedom. Kim Jong Il is still living in the world of 50 years ago, and is still fighting the capitalist vs communist Cold War. North Korea is still technically at war with NATO, of which Canada is a member. He has recently developed nuclear weapons technology and has missiles that can reach North America.

Threat to Canada: Moderate
Likely Actions: Nuclear attack.
Canadian Casualties: Zero up to the millions if a nuclear weapon struck the west coast.

Hugo Chavez Frias:
President of Venezuela and leader of the bloodless Bolivarian Revolution, Hugo Chavez is a colourful character. He is a borderline communist, though hasn't made the move to go that far yet. He is a close ally of several dangerous nations including Iran, North Korea, and Cuba. Chavez is strongly anti-American and anti-western. He has encouraged revolutions and has called the US president the devil. He gained power democratically in 1998 after he lead two failed military coup attempts. Chavez was a middle ranking military officer and knows about tactics. Venezuela sits on a huge oil deposit, which the government has total control of. An oil trade embargo could cause economic havoc.
Chavez and Venezuela like to cheer and egg on America's enemies.

Threat to Canada: Low
Likely Actions: Oil trade embargo
Canadian Casualties: None

George W Bush:
Bush is the somewhat comical president of the US. Some would argue he is the biggest threat to the world, but he is in fact more of a threat to his own people. His poorly planned defense measures are full of weak spots. He likes to blame others for America's problems. Doesn't get his facts straight. He tends to point the finger at Canada's weak border, while thousands of Mexicans stream into the US in the south.

Threat to Canada: None
Likely Actions: Tighter border security
Canadian Casualties: None.
read more...

Thursday, October 05, 2006

Scapegoat

It's been some time since Michael Jackson sang "it doesn't matter if you're black or white". Society has made significant improvements since the civil rights movements of the 1960s, or has it? A lot of people would have you believe the reverse. Apparently, our society is slipping towards the levels of Nazi Germany with a credo fit for the KKK. What a curious world we live in.

Of course, I'm going to talk abour Air India. When Stephen Harper was elected Prime Minister, he promised that an inquiry to the 1985 Air India bombing would be held. It was thought that the criminal trial didn't really bring justice so it's hoped that this civil inquiry would help bring some answers and closure.
The inquiry itself is now underway, but is already seriously flawed. Former Ontario premier Bob Ray had done an indepth report on the disaster and trial about a year ago. His conclusion was that although the investigation had its problems, there was no racial bias. The head judge of the inquiry disagrees. He feels that racism indeed played a part in corrupting the investigation.

Racism seems to be the universal scapegoat for society's problems. Apparently, all white people do is try and keep brown people down. Plato called this a true lie. A lie that so corrupts people's souls that it destroys society. Indeed, white people do not focus soley on trying to bring others down. Sure, there are racist people, but they are a very small minority. However, percieved racism is the most dangerous type. It's what cases the problems in our society. Most often, you'll hear anti-immigrant blurbs from people of all stripes, but I have never witnessed anybody be treated differently due to their colour or ethnicity. Unfortunately, a lot of visible minorities enjoy using the term when ever they feel they've been wronged. In my opinion, calling someone in our society a racist when they clearly are not is a high insult.

So where am I going with this? Well, first of all, this inquiry should be stopped immediately. It's an enormous waste of tax payer money. It truly is tragic for the families who lost loved ones. I'm getting the feeling though that no matter what the ruling, they will be unsatisfied. I'd rather see my money spent on more important things.
The judge in the inquiry should be ashamed of himself as well for even making such comments. Judges are not supposed to express their opinions at trials. They are supposed to listen to arguments from both sides and when the trial finishes, they then make an unbiased decision based on the evidence. This truly proves what a three ring circus our justice system is. Justice John Major, who is making the accusations, is a Supreme Court Judge to boot. I think this sheds a lot of light on the system. Perhaps the money would be better spend on holding a public inquiry about an incompetent justice system. Let the judges face the jury for a change.
read more...

Tuesday, October 03, 2006

Teach, Teach, Bang, Bang

The past month has been truly horrible. After the incident in Montreal, there seems to be a rash of copycat school shootings across Canada and the United States. Most recently was the execution style murders of five girls at an Amish school house in rural Pennsylvania.
School shootings seem to be becoming a disturbing trend again. They pop up about every five to ten years or so. Fortuantely, the most serious crime on the campus I attend is highway robbery, but these events have got me thinking. Are we really safe in our places of education?

It seems our youth in general are becoming increasingly violent. I'm not quite exactly sure why this is, but it's likely bad parenting plays a role. Parents not loving their kids enough and turning a blind eye to what they're doing. Not teaching them good values, such as how to resolve disputes without resorting to violence. Some of these people though are just nuts though. Then there's the whole thing about the games and TV watch; if you've read this blog long enough, you know where I stand on that.

So, are schools safe? Well, that depends. Inner city schools typically suffer higher rates of crime than suburban ones. Still, schools for the most part are safe places and parents need not worry. The truth is, the number of shootings of that magnitude, where people are targeted randomly, is very small. Your child is probably more likely to get hit by lightning than they are getting killed in that manor.

Even so, is there any way to prevent these horrible acts from happening? Unfortunately no. If someone wants to do it bad enough, they're going to do it. Gun controls won't work as they'll just obtain them illegally. Police on campus might work but don't act as a deterrant. The killer will still try to do his deed. All we can do is pray these disturbed people seek help before they act on their fantasies.
read more...

How About this Heat?

Climate change is a common buzz word heard around the halls of parliaments these days. We aren't doing enough to stop global warming, so says Ontario Environmental Comissioner Miller. There seems to be a lot of attention put into pollution controls and environmentalism these days, almost too much, but it's still apparently not enough.
Controlling pollution is important. We know that breathing dirty air is bad for our health. Much of it is caused by people driving cars too big for their needs, and inefficient methods of transporting goods (ie transport trucks). However, is this really destroying out planet?

First of all, I am going to make a very controversial statement. Global warming is a fear tactic. It is simply fear mongering by environmental groups to force people to cut pollution. Is it a hoax? possibly. We have had hot summers over the past few years, but we've had some pretty fridged winters too. Looking at records from weather offices, this is not out of the ordinary. In fact, the kind of weather we get hasn't changed much at all. Heat waves were normal in the 60s and 70s. Some of the most violent storms, including hurricanes, date back to 50 or more years ago.
Another, more likely answer is that yes, our climate is changing but not because of us. Earth's atmosphere is very volitile and climate change happens very frequently. Since the time of the dinosaurs, Canada went from being tropical paradise, to grasslands, to frozen wastland, to it's present form several times over. On a global scale, humans are a pretty insignificant. If the planet wanted to, it could just bat us as if we were mosquitos. Recent bouts of harsh weather have become a convinient way to "prove" the end of the world is coming. However, hurricanes and storms tend to be cyclical in nature. 2005 was a terrible year for hurricanes. After Katrina, "scientists" started saying that we'd most likely see the same amount of storms in the coming years, but they'd be far more powerful. The 2006 hurrican season has now passed it's peak and has been quiet. No storms have caused significant damage. Weather is an inexact science and I think it's wrong that environmentalists keep telling people it is.

Global warming in recent years has become something like US president Johnson's infamous Daisy commercial from the 1960s. Getting people to side with groups and politicians by putting out visions of an impending apocolypse, unless we do what they say. While I believe we should do what ever we can to reduce pollution. It's our home, keep it clean. Pollution levels are slowly dropping and the hole in the ozone layer has even begun to close. The world is not going to end anytime soon so lets cool it on global warming.
read more...

Air Sickness

I've been an aviation enthusiast for years. I'm officially declaring war on NDP MP Olivia Chow. Once again, it's over Toronto City Centre Airport (aka the island airport) and Porter airlines.

Three years ago, Toronto mayor David Miller made a campaign promise to end construction of a bridge to the island airport, a promise he made good on. Unfortunately for Toronto tax payers, the contracts had already been awarded and singed. The contractor threatened to sue the city for breaking contract. The fight has again been reignited over Porter Airlines. This new airline will fly deHavilland Dash-8s, twin engine turbo-prop airliners on a route to Ottawa, with other Canadian and American cities possible in the future.

You may be asking what's the big deal? Numorous reasons have been given. The most commonly cited problems are air and noise pollution. Other claims made are runways being too short. For those who don't know, a turbo-prop is basically a jet engine that uses a gear driven propeller. Unlike conventional jets, it's a closed, low power system. They are quieter and more energy efficient than big jets and piston engine planes. The planes themselves are no louder and do not pollute more than any other vehicle that operates in the area. Turbo-props also do not need long runways as jet airliners do, so the island airport's are more than long enough.

So what's the real reason to close this aiport? To find the anwer, we must travel three kilometers east across the harbour, to The Docks. The Docks are a massive entertainment complex along the waterfront. A couple months ago, the nightclub there had it's alcohol licence temporarily revoked due to noise complaints. Where did those complaints come from? The Toronto Islands, more specifically, the people who live on the eastern half of the islands.

Recent polls have shown that the vast majority of Torontonians feel the airport issue is dead. Even those who live in the downtown don't care. Many feel the airline is a good idea. Even at the best of times, it's a long drive to Pearson Airport from the downtown. A lot of people travel frequently to Ottawa and Montreal and have welcomed Porter. People like the idea of an airport in walking or transit distance. However, Island residence are not like most people. I believe "crunchy granola" has been used to describe them. They are in general quite socialist. Right up David Miller and Olivia Chow's ally. Much of the fight over the waterfront has been started by them. Though I do not oppose revitalizing the waterfront (as long as only Toronto pays for it), I do not believe a small minority of people should be dictating what should be done. First of all, the islands were meant as a park. The people living there are squatters. The city has tried for years, with mayors as recently as Mel Lastman trying to get them to leave. They are living there illegally. The airport is crown land. Both the recent Liberal and Conservative governments have refused to listen to complaints. Only the NDP seems to want to make this an issue.

So what should be done about the airport? Leave it, build that bridge, and let the issue die. Simple as that. It's time to end the dithering by Toronto's mayor and the NDP and focus on the real issues in the city such as crime and a crumbling transit system.
read more...

Monday, October 02, 2006

Bridge It

The big story this week has been the collapse of an over pass in Montreal. Several people were killed. It's raised some questions about the safety of our roads and bridges in Canada. My family has operated a small civil engineering firm that builds bridges around Ontario for the past 12 years. Are our bridges safe? For the most part they are. I can at least say the ones we've built are with a spotless MTO record to back that up.
However, there are some inherant flaws in our infrastructive. They come in the form of poor work by government engineers, shoddy construction by shiftless companies, and a lack of funding for road repair.

Canada's roads are simply a disgrace. I've been to second and third world countries in the Caribbean and Latin America that have better roads then we do. I'm not making that up. Are highways are crumbling. They are maintained by simple patchwork and shotcrete that simply holds them together for just a little longer. Governments will do anything to put off work. I've seen some bridges that look like they've been through a war zone. Harsh Canadian winters, heavy vehicles, and overuse of road salt take their toll on steel, concrete, and asphalt. Government engineers just seem to turn a blind eye to these problems. When bridges are slated to be worked on, they often do not know what needs to be done or how to go about it. They rely on contractors to do that. Unfortunately, some contractors are shiftless. They cut corners and bid work too cheap. Governments just do not seem to view roadwork as important, or any form of transit for that matter.

This is the kind of topic I could write a book about, but lets cut to the chase. How do we solve it.
Well first, we need to send %100 of the gas tax into road work. Not the 10% that governments are currently offering. The biggest mistake governments made was putting gas taxes into general revenue. Once they did that, little of the money went to where it was supposed to go.
Bridges also need more frequent, more thorough inspections. MTO engineers claim they inspect them at least once a month, but they do not. In reality, inspections are probably carried out once a year, if that. Number three, competant contractors should be rewarded and shiftless ones should be kept a closer eye on. Governments should only rely on contractors to do the work, not to figure out how to do it. Better engineers need to be hired and there must be better communication in engineering departments and with contractors.
read more...