Shane Jolley dot com

Independence Day

2011-06-02T15:18:00.000-04:00

It is with a mixture of sadness and relief that I have stepped down from the nomination race to represent the Green Party of Ontario in the October provincial election. I will instead be running as an independent candidate.

This decision comes as no surprise to those who have been following my writing of late regarding the evils of the party system. It is this system that has caused me to make my decision. I have every respect for my colleagues in the Green Party and I have few disagreements with their policies, but I can no longer run under any party banner with a clear conscience.

The party system has become a self-serving power structure that does not adequately serve the interests of local constituents. My sole reason to run for office is to help the citizens of Grey and Bruce navigate the serious challenges that we are facing due to global economics, rising energy prices, and rural inequities.

There are many opportunities for our region to capitalize on the challenges and not only survive these challenges, but to thrive in spite of them. The party system has increasingly become a barrier to achieving meaningful action on behalf of Bruce/Grey citizens.

Our long-time MPP Bill Murdoch has said, “it seems to me over the past 100 years or so we have taken away the individual rights of elected members of government, and in doing so, we have taken away the rights of constituents who elected them”.

I agree wholeheartedly with Bill’s assessment. We need a return to system where local citizens are engaged, involved, and taken seriously at Queen’s Park. Instead of listening to citizens, parties attempt to convince the electorate that their package of ideas is the right package. From this we get all kinds of ridiculous assumptions, such as the expectation that elected members, much less constituents, should all agree on every detail of a platform. I’ve always said that anyone who agrees with every aspect of a party’s policies is either a liar, or an idiot.

To quote Bill Murdoch again, “In my view, a government should be applauded because they are so confident in their leadership, so certain of their direction, that they allow members to think, to react, to represent, and to vote.” Again, in Bill’s words, “If you didn’t get elected to speak your mind, to defend your constituents and to adjust or even change the system – then what did you get elected for?”

With Bill Murdoch retiring, who will continue to fight for proper representation of the citizens of Grey/Bruce? Since talk is cheap, I’ve made the decision to put actions to my words and devote myself completely to the interests of this region, free of party influence.

Thank you to the people of Grey/Bruce who have put so much confidence in me this far. I look forward to continuing to serve on your behalf.

The Hat is in the Ring

2011-05-09T16:22:00.001-04:00

After months of deliberation, I've decided to stand for nomination to run in the October 2011 Ontario election to represent Bruce-Grey-Owen Sound.

Almost four years ago I ran against incumbent Bill Murdoch and came away with 33 percent of the vote. Since then I've been coordinating the LocalMotive Project and having a great time helping other Grey/Bruce residents come to terms with the challenges we face here.

The decision to run again was a difficult one, due to the success of the LocalMotive Project and the question of where my energy is best spent on behalf of local residents. It has become apparent over the past few years that much of what needs to be done locally to ensure a strong future here requires legislative change at the provincial level.

It is for this reason that I feel I can best further the goals of the LocalMotive Project and the interests of our region by serving as MPP in the Ontario legislature. So now I'm asking for your support.

The nomination meeting is scheduled for Wednesday, June 1st at the Bayshore Community Centre in Owen Sound. I ask that you take out a Green Party of Ontario membership here, and then attend the nomination meeting to cast a vote for me to represent you in the October election. You must be a member by May 18th in order to vote.

I thank you for your support and I look forward to continued service if successfully nominated.

Shane.

An Ill Wind

2011-05-09T16:04:00.001-04:00

Only a government could take something as pure and simple as wind and make it more despised than a snowstorm in July.

I follow the continued debate about wind power in Ontario with dismay, as both proponents and opponents distort the facts to fortify their positions. To some, the image of a wind turbine is the very symbol of a clean energy future. To others it is the symbol of corporate imperialism; the extraction of resources and profit without compensation.

The issue has pitted neighbour against neighbour in communities across Grey and Bruce Counties. At the core of it is the McGuinty government’s disrespect for the decision making authority of rural municipalities, informed by local citizens.

In an attempt to push back against the heavy hand of provincial government policy, many faulty claims are trotted out as fact. Take the economic argument for example. Opponents point to the subsidies offered through the Feed-in Tariff and MicroFit programs as evidence that wind power is uneconomical, without pointing out that all forms of power generation in Ontario are heavily subsidized. In 2010, the Ontario Power Authority payed out $269 million in subsidies to all renewable sources of energy, which amounts to about 0.2 cents of the average 13 cents per kilowatt hour on the typical electricity bill.

The subsidy numbers on nuclear power are much more difficult to obtain. The costs of construction, operation, decommissioning, waste storage, the “external” costs of dirty uranium mining, etc have not been calculated into the price per kWh, but there is one number we know for sure. In 2010 the Ontario Power Authority (by way of you, the taxpayer) payed out $1.35 billion - 5 times the renewable subsidy - to meet nuclear and gas purchase agreements. Those purchase agreements are contracts to buy excess power that cannot be used due to the limitations of our aging power grid.

Yes, that is $1.35 billion for power that was never used. In one year.

Now before all the wind farm proponents reading this get all giddy with excitement and self-righteous glee, I should mention that $269 million is still a mighty large wad of cash if it’s going to the wrong place. You see, the question is not whether to subsidize or not subsidize. Unless power users want to pay at least double the current rate, subsidies are here to stay. The question at hand is who benefits from the monies payed out?

This is where the McGuinty government blew it on an epic scale. Someone thought Ontarians would be fine with funneling huge gobs of taxpayer money to multinational corporations like Samsung in Korea, with no say in the matter.

Rather than beating this dead horse any further, how do we move forward from here?

Sensible energy policy in Ontario requires addressing three key issues. Ownership, decentralization, and conservation.

The conservation argument is so obvious that I can’t for the life of me figure out why we’re still not getting serious about it. 16 to 20 cents spent on conservation and efficiency programs achieves the same benefit as a whole dollar spent on development of new sources of generation. One cannot help wonder who the Ontario Power Authority is really working for when they continue to put the interests of power corporations ahead of the interests of the Ontario taxpayer.

The second key ingredient in creating a more sensible energy policy for Ontario involves the further decentralization of power production in the province. Our current system relies upon large centralized power infrastructure - nuclear plants, coal plants and wind farms - sending power to large centralized transfer stations. In our case, the power gets sent all the way to Milton before it is redistributed back out onto the grid. There are two major problems with this system. First, a whopping 20 percent of the power generated in Ontario is lost in transmission. It disappears into thin air never to be used. This is astonishing waste. The second problem is that transmission capacity is often reserved for large power plants, preventing small energy producers from even accessing the grid.

The solution is restructuring the Ontario grid to a “smart grid”. A smart grid sends the power as it is produced to the closest point of use, then distributes the remainder to next point of use and so on. The redevelopment of the grid could be financed almost entirely from elimination of line loss, and it would open up opportunities for every home, farm, and business to become power producers. They would profit from a more stable, clean power supply and renewable subsidies would be channeled back to Ontario taxpayers rather than to multinational corporations.

The third component in a sensible energy policy involves more local ownership of power infrastructure. Rather than large-scale wind farms owned by foreign corporations, imposed against the will of the community, we need both the ownership and the profits of wind and other power projects under local control. This can take the form of community energy co-ops, small-scale private projects, or municipally owned power production. All would include meaningful input from the community and shared benefits. It is clear from other jurisdictions around the world that when the community has a direct stake in the success of an energy project, it encounters little opposition.

The direct benefits can be in the form of municipal revenues from energy sales, reduced energy costs from preferential municipal pricing, or direct profits to local owners; all of which get recycled into the local economy.

Conservation, decentralization and local ownership.

The ingredients are there, now we need a provincial leader with the vision to put the long-term interests of taxpayers ahead of short-term political gain.

BGOS Green Party of Ontario Nomination Meeting

2011-05-09T15:23:00.002-04:00

Wednesday June 1, 2011 - 7:00pm

Bayshore Community Centre - Owen Sound, Ontario

The Green Party of Ontario will be nominating a candidate to run in the October 6th Ontario provincial election. The nomination meeting will be held at the Bayshore Community Centre in Owen Sound on Wednesday June 1st.

You must be a member of the Green Party of Ontario by Wednesday May 18th to be eligible to cast a ballot.

Memberships can be taken out or renewed online at http://gpo.ca .

For detail contact Debbie Boyd at 519-371-9345.

Looking Forward

2010-04-10T09:37:00.001-04:00

I would like to thank the Green Party of Ontario members, volunteers, staff, and executive for helping make the past two years very productive in the development of the GPO, and the improvement of democracy in Ontario.

My term as co-deputy leader has been both challenging and rewarding, and I am fortunate to have served during a time when we have moved from a growing party just finding it’s legs, to a truly professional political organization, capable of having serious impact on the future of Ontario politics.

I believe that the objectives for which I ran for the Deputy Leader position have been largely achieved, including the election of a competent leader, the establishment of a functional organizational structure within the GPO, and the training of a number a candidates across the province. These objectives have been achieved by a dedicated and competent team of volunteers over the past two years, and I am honoured to have been a part of it.

As in any political organization, there are a variety of opinions on policy and strategy, and this is very healthy in a democracy. For the GPO, the unifying force behind our success continues to be our 10 key values. We must keep sight of these values and measure our policies and actions against them to maintain a true course. Over the past several years, the leadership of the party has gained much experience and success in translating our key values into pragmatic ideas to secure a strong future and enhance quality of life in Ontario. The voters and the media are taking note of the GPO’s fresh approach to politics and community building, and if we are diligent we will continue to find success in shaping Ontario’s future.

I am stepping down from the position with a secure sense that the GPO will continue to make great progress leading up to the 2011 election. I am looking forward to refocusing on the Grey/Bruce region, and practicing once again what I have been teaching other prospective candidates about service to their communities and building profile at the grassroots level. I encourage every member, volunteer, and potential candidate to devote yourself wholeheartedly to your community. People are looking for community leaders who are first servants, in contrast to the many politicians who seek only personal advancement. True leadership begins with serving others, and in inspiring citizens to do the same.

Ironically, my stepping down has presented excellent opportunities to speak to the press about the excellent state of the GPO, it’s leadership, and the policy directions heading toward 2011.

My work with the LocalMotive Project has become my primary focus due to the incredible success that the movement is realizing in Bruce and Grey Counties. A unique opportunity is emerging to lead my region a more resilient and sustainable direction and I must shift my attention to address this timely opportunity.

Please keep up the great work on behalf of Ontarians. Success will come as we embrace the challenge ahead.

Can you hear the crickets?

2010-01-20T16:58:00.003-05:00

Yes, its a little quite around here.

It seems that The LocalMotive Project has become quite a time consumer (that's a good thing). So I'll be doing my blogging over at The LocalMotive Project site for the next while.

This site may collect cobwebs for the time being but there's lots of action over there.

LocalMotive Townhall Meeting - Neustadt

2010-01-05T11:19:00.001-05:00

Friday January 15, 2010 - 7:00pm
Noah's Inn - Neustadt, Ontario

Do you ever feel like the future of your community is in jeopardy? Do you wish that local citizens had more say in their economic destiny? Then this gathering is for you.

Come out and join the discussion of how we can make our community more resilient now, and ensure a strong future for generations to come.

All are welcome. No charge.

Discussion will be facilitated by Shane Jolley
Presented by the LocalMotive Project
http://localmotiveproject.com

January 11, 2010 -GPO Agriculture Policy Roundtable

2010-01-05T09:25:00.000-05:00

January 11th - 4:30-6:30pm
Elmwood Community Centre - Elmwood, Ontario

Please join myself and GPO leader Mike Schreiner for the GPO Agriculture Policy Roundtable.

The Green Party of Ontario is seeking input from farmer's and rural citizen's affected by provincial agriculture policy, to help us improve/expand our policy platform looking toward the 2011 election.

The Roundtable will be an informal discussion of current policy as well as consideration/brainstorming of new policy, facilitated by Mike Schreiner.

Light food (sandwiches, fruit, coffee, etc.) will be provided.

All are welcome.

"A Growing Season" at Tom Thomson Art Gallery

2010-01-04T12:24:00.000-05:00

Sunday, January 10, 2010
A Growing Season

The Art Gallery presents a special screening of A Growing Season. This 50 minute documentary film explores the current state of the family farm and the perils of "globalized" food production. 50 min film followed by Q & A with Directors. Admission by donation (Proceeds to local foodbank).

See the trailer here.

LocalMotive Strategy Meeting

2009-12-21T14:35:00.002-05:00

Tuesday January 5th, 2010 - The Falls Inn, Walter's Falls
7:00pm

All who are interested in helping to move the LocalMotive project forward are welcome to attend.

This will be an informal open discussion over drinks and wings.

Discussion will include organizing Town Hall meetings, brainstorming specific re-localization projects, and ways to engage the community in those efforts.

For more about The LocalMotive Project click here.

See you there.

Meeting Our Maker

2009-06-25T17:38:00.002-04:00

The following is reprinted from Ryan Hayhurst at Niagara Escarpment Organics. It's too good not to share.

Perhaps you might have caught a glimpse of last Saturday's globe - 'Brace yourselves for apocalypse now' is a pretty bold headline. Perhaps you might have caught a glimpse of last Saturday's Globe?

Add this nice summary of environmental doom's day scenarios and financial meltdowns to the increasing social instability, itself inseperable from the resource scarcity and disenranchising power hierarchies that is the root, of the North vs. South, rich vs. poor, North Korea vs. the World divides....now top it off with a pinch of icing sugar and the news that Jamie Kennedy is having to close one of his fine dining establishments and I think we can surely conclude the the end is near. Right?

Personally, I think Wednesdays' news of Mr. Kennedy's demise, paired with a side order of Michael Pollen's 'The Optimistic Omnivore', only demonstrates two things:
1) Rich people do occasionally eat at home, maybe more so now
2) Mr. Kennedy and Mr. Pollen, like ourselves at NEO, believe so strongly that we can, should and will soon have to be feeding ourselves more locally grown organic food and the longer we ignore this fact the further into an apocalypse of our own making.

However, to say that local food is 'arguably killing his business', would I think (and I suspect the author just did) put the wrong words in Kennedy's mouth because I am sure that he knows as well as we do that it is not that good local food is too expensive, it's that mass produced foods from the global marketplace arrive in our grocery stores and run of the mill restaurants at a price that would be almost impossible for you local diversified small scale grower to match. And as our culture continues to prove year after year, people would rather devote 10% more to their entertainment and technology budget than to supporting a network of small local growers that are aptly stewarding the land and nurturing the water, soil air and communities which make life possible...leaving our environment and long term health at risk.

Similarly, our Government is more concerned with 'getting shovels in the ground' on building new roads for their (our) newly purchased public car company than they are with implementing solutions that address the underliying unsustainable nature of our industrial global economy and move us toward a new paradigm where we can still think and share knowledge at a global level, but do a much better job of meeting our material needs as locally as possible, especially when it comes to food.

Of course, this might mean have to support local farmers who might charge a little more than Walmart for salad greens. Or perhaps having to eat an apple that has a blemish on it or a carrot with a crook in its neck. It might even spur some of us to rip up that lawn and get a garden going - good now we're on our way. Stop at the farmer's market before going to the grocery store - this seems perfectly logical. Send my unruly teenager to work with Farmer Ryan under the hot summer sun instead of playing videogames - now that's a great idea!

Of course, if people see this as some cruel and unusual punishment (how dare you take my cheap food away from me - tonight's the Cup finals and the guys are coming over for bugers and beers!?) then clearly Jamie Kennedy's not the only one with a problem. So how do we convince people to spend more on food when they'd rather spend it on their cell phone?

Maybe try and convince them of food's worth, of food's primal place in our lives. We need to get back into the web of life, the food chain that links every being to everything else and tell people, heck show people, what a beautiful place this planet is.
Celebrate food as often as possible, talk about it as much as you can. Sure pair it with a glass of wine, but forget not of the terrior that gave that wine it's distinction. Miss not an opportunity to let people know where those greens were grown, how that carrot was harvested, why Small is Beautiful and which hierllom tomatoes have unsurpassed character. And don't just do it when there's a big game on or a holiday to celebrate - make meals the focus our our everyday lives and discover the joy, love and conversation that can come out of our food.

To borrow that now tired phrase, "be the Change", please folks. And no, I am not saying that everyone should rush out to Jamie Kennedy's and pay $50 for a sandwich. We are, however, at a crucial time in the history of food when our consciousness about what is right and wrong is on the rise, and we have to keep voting with our dollars.

Everyone one of us has to take responsibility for getting ourselves and our food system ready for the post carbon economy. If we fail to, not only will we loose a sense of our own gastronomic selves, but we'll have to live on imported GMO everything from our southern neighbours, that is, if they have any surplus to offer up after their industrial economic world gets rocked for real in the next 10-20 years if the water shortages don't get to them first.

When that ship starts sinking, Canada may be in a better position that most nations due to our abundant resources, but if we don't have strong community based local food networks, our fortunes are going to end up like that last poor guy through the buffet line - a couple of pickled onions and some overcooked meatloaf, if we're lucky.

A Silver Lining to the Economic Downturn

2009-05-16T16:47:00.002-04:00

The following is from Mike Nickerson, who will be speaking in Owen Sound at the Downtown Bookstore on June 16th at 7:30pm. All are welcome.

An alternative to panicking when GDP stops growing is to view it as a sign of maturity.

Human activity cannot expand forever on our finite planet. An economy growing at 3% a year doubles its size every 24 years. Centuries of such growth have brought us to a mature size. As with individual maturity, there comes a time for societies to stop growing and to take responsibly for their strength and impacts on others.

As a mature species, we have two responsibilities to Earth and ultimately, to ourselves. The first is to live within the availability of natural resources. Global production of oil has stalled for three years at about 85 million barrels a day, yet demand continues to increase. This results in rising prices. The increased cost is reminding us all about how dependent we are on this particular resource.

While fossil fuels are a well-known resource issue, there is also cause for concern with fresh water, forests, fish, soil fertility and other resources.

Our second responsibility is to keep our waste within tolerable bounds. Climate change is a direct result of human activity having grown to where our C02 emissions are overwhelming the ability of oceans and forests to absorb it, leaving it to accumulate in the atmosphere. What is the logic of policies aimed at doubling our size, when current activities, at the present population level, have already brought us to the edge of climate chaos?

Climate change is not the only issue related to tolerance. Respiratory problems, many cancers and other illnesses, which result from the accumulation of manufactured toxins, are also wake up calls.

The sub-prime mortgage crisis rivals the price of fuel and climate change in terms of public concern. It too can be linked to confrontation with planetary limits.

Over the centuries, the expansion of our growth-dependent type of monetary system has inflated it to gargantuan proportions. In North America, to accomplish 3% growth, over four hundred billion dollars in new business has to take place in the present year. This is over and above the fifteen trillion dollars worth of transactions already taking place. Large amounts of new money has to be loaned into existence to accommodate this expansion.

Before humans filled the Earth, there were areas of untapped natural resources, from which we could produce things of tangible value that people were willing and able to pay for - businesses, houses, tools, food and the like - to back up an exponentially expanding money supply. By the 1980s, it was becoming increasingly difficult to produce enough real wealth to do the job. Following "junk bonds," and the DotCom bubble, bidding up real estate became a primary means for expanding the money supply. When that bubble threatened to burst after 9/11, interest rates were dropped to almost nothing and mortgages were offered to people with no down payments and little credit worthiness. At hundreds of thousands of dollars each, great quantities of money were loaned into circulation. It appeared to work, until energy driven inflation prompted interest rate increases that many sub-prime mortgage holders were unable to pay.

These problems indicate that the time has come for a fundamental change. Fuel prices, climate change and the sub-prime mortgage crisis are all symptoms of one cause. They will not effectively be resolved until the fact that human activity has grown to stretch planetary limits is addressed. We cannot grow out of problems that result from our size.

When we stopped growing as individuals, it was not the end of the world. Indeed, for most of us, life had scarcely begun before physical maturity. Even as physical growth ended, we became better informed, more comfortable in ourselves and we developed the skills and relationships that define our lives. The same can be true for civilization.

Among the first things societies can do, as we acknowledge our maturity, is to shift investment into education and health care. Unlike cars and expanding highway networks, which are resource and waste intensive, education and health care (particularly care at the preventative level) consist almost entirely of knowledge and good will.

Another step will be to revive local, small-scale agriculture. Food produced in this way requires less fuel and other natural resources and has been shown to produce more food per acre, of a higher nutritional quality, than industrial scale farming.

Investing in education, health care and local food security makes sense, if what we want is a healthy, well fed, educated population. With the present commitment to make money grow, however, such goals appear self-serving. Our advanced size requires that all our efforts be focused on monetary expansion.

Do we want to grow money or food? As long as our goal is defined as making the GDP grow, efficiency will be measured entirely in terms of what makes the most money. Even though industrial agriculture produces less food per acre, than small-scale local framing, it does produce a greater crop of investment capital. Money borrowed for heavy equipment, fuel, pesticides and fertilizer earns interest and, driven by payment schedules, stimulates efforts to maximize financial return. Local farming, on the other hand, contributes relatively little to the immediate need of expanding capital. It tends to put money into the pockets of farmers who, rather than investing it, are more likely to buy food, shelter and education for their children.

When industrialization began, it was recognized that mechanized, mass production could provide products at a fraction of the cost of hand-made goods. The main obstacle to applying the industrial process to all manner of goods was a shortage of capital. Because it costs a lot of up-front money to build an industry, our system of mutual provision (the economy) was designed to encourage the expansion of capital. However, now that the world is awash in so much capital that, a continuous stream of speculative bubbles is necessary to give it places to invest, it is time for another goal.

As we mature as a society, the things that indicate well-being change. Measuring how much a baby grows is a good measure of its health; it is not an effective way to measure the well-being of an adult. If we want to resolve today's multiple crises, we need more detailed information.

At present, if there is a natural disaster, toxic spill or a health epidemic, the costs of dealing with the problems are added to the GDP, giving the false impression that we are better off. While more money might be flowing, life is degraded by such things. If we were to measure social and environmental factors of well-being with the same authority and enthusiasm with which we measure GDP, much of the confusion would be avoided. A Genuine Progress Index (GPI) would provide a broader spectrum of information, enabling the costs and benefits of different activities to be assessed with greater accuracy. Along with the traditional economic indicators, accounts about air quality and health issues, for example, would reveal that the hundreds of millions of dollars spent annually on medicine to relieve respiratory suffering is more a sign of distress than of economic progress.

A legitimized indicator that shows whether social and environmental factors are improving or deteriorating would create the awareness needed to stimulate serious actions toward solving the problems.

By identifying resource draw-down, pollution, and disruptions to communities, with a GPI, external factors would enter the picture. Presently externalized costs are not included in the price of goods. When such costs are added to production costs, those goods that are socially and environmentally friendly would be less expensive and those that cause problems would cost more. Both consumers and producers would then be inclined toward responsible products.

Taking the additional step of shifting the skill, ingenuity and persuasive effort that is presently applied toward engineering obsolescence, and, instead, using it to design durable, easily repaired goods, and to reclaim pride in objects that have long served us, could cut up to 50% off of our material and energy consumption and consequent impacts.

One final shift - from looking for fulfillment in material goods, to seeking it in friendships, knowledge, appreciation, service, music, art, sport and adventure - would complete the transformation. Coupled with environmentally responsible agriculture, such a change could reduce our impacts to practically nothing. That is, the real costs of maintaining well-being for humans, in terms of the ability of Earth to sustain life over time, would be negligible.

By finding satisfaction in the richness of being human, we could change the image of our species from that of a potentially terminal blight on the Earth, to something much more suiting to our position amidst the life of this planet. As a mature species, we could reward three billion years of evolution by adding laughter, love, awe and wonder to a deep appreciation for the incredible accomplishments by which life has brought us to this point.

While arguments persist about oil supplies, climate change and the possibility of perpetual economic expansion, we are well advised to acknowledge the ultimate finiteness of Earth and accept responsibility. Policies intent on expanding until the last possible moment will almost certainly be followed by disaster.

Human ingenuity is more than sufficient to provide food, shelter and other necessities without having to double the total of all our activities every 24 years. It is a Question of Direction. We need to choose between the goal of perpetual growth and that of long-term well-being.

We celebrate when our children grow. If an adult continues to grow like a child, however, it is cause for serious concern. Developing a healthy steady-state economy is no more frightening than the prospect of becoming adult is for a teenager. The silver lining to this economic downturn is the opportunity it offers to grow up and take responsibility for our impacts. It can be done.

Mike Nickerson is the author of
"Life, Money & Illusion; Living on Earth as if we want to stay"

Municipal Green Association

2009-02-19T11:39:00.003-05:00

Richard Murray recently posted a very interesting proposal on the Green Party Blog which I thought was worth giving a little more light of day. The only problem that I see would be keeping “politics” out of the municipal arena, not that in many cases it is not bubbling beneath the surface already.

His proposal is to create the Canadian Municipal Green Party Association (CMPGA), which would have five objectives:

To encourage Canadians to become involved in the Canadian political system,2. To educate members of the CMGPA in the workings of their local municipal government,3. To train members on how to campaign for office,4. To train members on how to hold office, and5. To provide a grassroots communications forum for those involved in municipal politics……….

This Association would not be a political party. The CMGPA would exist to encourage and support the involvement at the municipal level of individuals who believe the fundamentals of the Global Greens, The Green Party of Canada and their provincial Green Party……………..

There are two reasons why the Green Party at both the provincial and federal levels should support the CMPGA:
Participatory Democracy is one of our fundamental principles, and
Municipal politics serves as a training and recruiting ground for both provincial and federal politics…………..

There would be three functions the CMPGA would carry out;
Encouragement to the general public to learn about and be active in Canadian politics.1. “While we would naturally prefer you to be a member of the Green Party, we consider it a victory if you decide to become active in any way.”2. To be an information and training resource to our members. This would primarily be through the Internet.3. To encourage our members to share information and help each other. This would be through forums on the Internet and through meetings.

Do read the whole thing, we do need fresh blood in our political system and this may be one way to help those interested in getting involvolved.

Cross posted at The Rural Canadian

Rick Mercer on Democracy

2009-01-15T12:48:00.000-05:00

This weeks rant on The Mercer Report is particularly worth repeating, Rick always cuts to the heart of the matter with his commentary and this one is no exception. We must indeed “wake up and protect our democracy.”
Ricks Rant….
So a month before Christmas it actually looked like the Harper government was going to collapse and be replaced with a coalition. No doubt about it a very interesting scenario, and for a lot of people not a very nice one. But like it or not our system is designed that way.
The truly astounding thing was, in the middle of the whole fiasco, the Dominion Institute did a poll and they found out that a majority of Canadians had no idea what was going on and in fact lacked a basic understanding of our parliamentary system. This is a crisis.
And what did our own government do? They went out of their way to make it worse. They had ministers go on TV and say this was a coup d'etat, that coalitions were illegal and undemocratic. John Baird said his government had the right to ignore the will of parliament altogether and go over the head of the Governor General. None of which is true.
How can a country function when half the population doesn't know what the hell is going on and their own government actually likes it that way?
Being a good citizen is like driving a car. We all have to know the basic rules of the road. We don't have to like the rules, we can even get together and change the rules. But we all have to know how to proceed when dealing with a four way stop or a blinking red. And it doesn't matter if John Baird is in the back seat saying, no, no, no; go straight on through, don't stop – we know we have to stop, look both ways, and then floor it.
Canada is no different. We are a parliamentary democracy. And that system has served us well for 141 years. But clearly we've fallen asleep at the wheel. And if we want to protect this democracy, we all have an obligation to wake up and get informed; because quite frankly our members of parliament can't be trusted with it anymore.
http://www.rickmercer.com/blog/index.cfm/2009/1/14
Let me repeat Ricks words…
A majority of Canadians had no idea what was going on and in fact lacked a basic understanding of our parliamentary system. This is a crisis. Wake up and get informed; because quite frankly our members of parliament can't be trusted with it anymore.

Posted by Rural

Canada Gets Colossal Fossil

2008-12-13T12:50:00.000-05:00

After eight years during which the United States was consistently derided as the most obstructive force in international climate negotiations, Canada moved into worst place today, receiving the "Colossal Fossil" award for having done more than any other country to drag down talks at the UN climate negotiations in Poznan.

More at http://ruralcanadian.blogspot.com/2008/12/four-fossil-awards-for-canada....

Posted by Rural

"Local Food" Store to Open in Owen Sound

2008-11-27T00:25:00.000-05:00

Anne Finlay-Stewart is currently in the process of opening a local food market in downtown Owen Sound (with free parking!)

Anne is a regular blogger here on the Grey-Bruce views page, as well as my former campaign manager, and a regular member of the "get 'er done" set in Owen Sound.

The new store will offer year-round access to the best food the region has to offer.

The Grey Local of the National Farmers Union has given the plan amazing support with money, experienced advice, committed suppliers and hands-on help.

So far Anne has committed local producers of beef, lamb, chicken, eggs, pheasant, garlic, shallots, squash, pumpkins, yogurt, cereals, flours, fish, honey, maple syrup, apple products, coffee and pasta, and promises of some of your favourites like Tom Pink's chocolate cream horns and Curry in a Hurry's prepared dishes. And she's barely begun to ask.

The model is the 100 Mile Market in Meaford, and owners Barb and Dave could not be any more supportive and helpful. They see this kind of cooperation among producers, retailers and customers as the key to sustainable communities with a secure, healthy food supply.

If you're interested in supporting this venture, here's the pitch. Anne is looking for people who will invest $1000, for 5% per annum, paid semi-annually in store credits. The term is 5 years, with no penalty for early pay-out. Some people are going to put up their $1000 in "sweat equity" instead, on the same terms (except I'll repay in cash, not sweat!)

If this sounds like your kind of venture, or if you want to ask questions, share ideas, give advice or tell Anne what you'd like to see in a local food market, please email her at annekfs@gmail.com or call her at 519-371-3933.

The likely location of the store will be 1st Ave. W. on the riverfront.

Toxic Water

2008-11-24T00:23:00.000-05:00

The following is re-posted from GPO Leader Frank de Jong. I believe it's time this issue was addressed by Owen Sound and other Bruce-Grey communities:

Halton council is debating whether or not to halt water fluoridation. Despite the recommendation by their medical officer of health, Dr. Bob Nosal, to continue adding fluoride to water, Halton Council, reacting to public pressure, has wisely delayed the decision to allow time for more study.

Fluoride in drinking water reduces dental caries, say some experts. Other experts show that the number of dental caries is the same whether water is fluoridated or not. B.C. and Alberta, for example, have similar rates of caries yet drinking water in B.C. is 95 per cent non-fluoridated, and drinking water in Alberta is 75 per cent fluoridated. Most of Western Europe doesn't fluoridate its water, with no difference in dental health to our own.

Other studies show that fluoride can cause brain damage, especially in children. Fluoride is a potential immunotoxin, embryotoxin and neurotoxin. Yet Ontario has done no studies. Apparently the province cares more about our children's teeth then their brains.

There is evidence that fluoride reduces tooth decay only when used on contact but does nothing positive when taken internally, toothpaste containing fluoride is effective, but since it is a toxin, care should be taken not to ingest any of it. Some claim certain levels are safe, others that there is no safe level.

There is concern over babies drinking fluoridated water for six months -- even before they even have teeth -- at a time when they are most susceptible to the toxin. There is concern over fluorosis, which causes white spots on teeth when a person has too much fluoride in their body. Yet in Ontario, at great expense, we expose our bodies to fluoride, plus we wash our cars, flush our toilets, take showers, and water lawns and gardens with fluoridated water.

To fluoridate or not is an Ontario-wide issue, and should not be left to resource-strapped municipalities to address, one at a time. The health of our citizens, especially our children, demands that the Ontario government launch medical and health studies to determine whether there is sufficient evidence to continue this controversial practice, or whether the precautionary principle dictates that it should be stopped.

Who Wants MORE?

2008-11-22T12:52:00.000-05:00

I recently had a rant in which I asked what is wrong with unionized workers who are currently asking for MORE when many of us are wondering if we are going to get ANY. My ire is now raised even further by this from the Sun Times which is just a small reflection of the situation across Ontario…..

“The Elementary Teachers' Federation of Ontario is holding meetings today in Owen Sound and Chesley to give an update about contract negotiations with the Bluewater District School Board. The four-year collective agreement for all elementary public school teachers expired on Aug. 31, 2008…………..

"We've had no discussions with the government since last May and we've made it very clear that if Nov. 30 is an ultimatum, we're not going to have those discussions," ………..On the table right now is a 12.5 per cent raise over four years, with additional money for improved working conditions and more positions with lower class sizes. “

Now whilst I think we all agree that the teachers have a challenging job, most of us believe that they are well compensated for their endeavors, there certainly are a lot of “retired” teachers who are either remarkably well preserved or not near as old as the rest of us at retirement! These folk are paid out of the taxpayers pocket and like many other “government” employees who have a pretty secure, above average paying job, are still not satisfied, it seems that every few months some public employees union is asking for more and threatening job action. I for one am getting very tired of it, the private sector has the same problem but there is little I can do about that, but those paid out of the public purse had better look out because I can, and will, be very vocal about how good they have things and how tough it is out here in the “real world”.

One of the things that always gets me regarding these “negotiations” is the way in which things are ignored (by both sides?) until the current contracts have expired or are about to, “no discussions since last May”, 12 % on the table and that’s not good enough, what is wrong with this, especially when the Catholic board has just settled for just that? Any contract I have ever had as a self employed contractor is null and void once the term has ended and if you want to continue with it you had best get your act in gear and get a new one! The other thing is if you have agreed to certain conditions and remuneration for the past 3 years why would you not attempt to take any wage raises totally off the table in return for a simple cost of living raise annually, but then the unions would have little to justify their existence! The answer is quite simply GREED, fed by the unions telling their members that they have an ENTITLEMENT to MORE, a position the union bosses take to maintain their own jobs. Most folks would grab that cost of living option, or for that matter an annual 3% raise, without question, for few of us get any annual raise at all and indeed in these time will be bloody glad to even retain our jobs or our businesses.

I am not picking upon just the teachers here, as with other “closed shop” professions they have little say in the “negotiations” and only get to vote after the union hierarchy have struck a deal. I often wonder how many of the “members” truly support the process but feel pressured to go along with the union position. With the government sending signals that the public sector workers must expect less in future contracts, as indeed they should, I suspect we will see much posturing and disruption from those making a living from “representing” this sector. I know that thing are going to change out here for families and small businesses, it is going to be waste not want not for the next few years, we can but hope that the unions and their members both public sector and corporate sector also get the picture and become part of the solution not part of the problem. It is the greed of “investors”, corporations and their “directors”, unions and the like, assisted by shaky practices the financial sector who have precipitated this mess, but make no mistake it is the little guy that will both take the brunt of it AND be the one to make the sacrifices necessary to get us out of it.

Posted by Rural

Can Local Food Break Free of the Niche Market?

2008-11-15T13:01:00.000-05:00

Presenters were really stepping back from the microphone to take a look at the big picture this morning, as stakeholders in the culinary tourism and local food system movement charted the progress thus far and challenges ahead for the gastronomic phenomena that has seen the word LOCAL slapped up against just about everything in the consumer world.

And so it is with mixed blessing that I return from today’s Culinary Tourism Summit at Toronto’s Royal Winter Fair. First off, no this isn’t like the Slow Food Movement’s Terra Madre where invite only food connoisseurs rub shoulders with artisanal agricultural producers from the world over. This was, however, a timely event where paid attendees (in my case) could listen in as Ontario’s Culinary Tourism Associations (Savour Muskoka, The Taste Trail of Prince Edward County, etc.) reported in on the year that was, and a number of small producer associations from around southern Ontario faced up about their experiences linking producers with restaurant and institutional buyers in the city. Needless to say, the room was filled with boundless optimism as reports continue to suggest that people are paying attention like never before to what they eat, and tourists are now planning vacations based on where they will eat and what.

So food matters, right?

And if we are entering a new era, if globalized supply chains really are coming to an end, and our society is again realizing the blessed rationality of eating as much as possible within our own food shed, why am I not jumping for joy?

Perhaps it’s because it didn’t feel as though we had solved all the world’s problems in that room today even though at one point we came very close to admitting what the problem is. The discussion was at the intersection of farmer and consumer, the issue, naturally, arriving at price and distribution.

“How do we arrive at a fair price for local food, one that meets the farmers needs and yet competes on price with cheap mainstream (often imported) product, such that more consumers will switch to buying local? Or is there enough added value in the local produce, including local environmental, social, and economic benefits, that the customer won’t mind paying a bit more? Is there a role here for the public purse to make up the difference and compensate local farmers for environmental services that they provide, or should the free market ultimately dictate who succeeds and who fails?”

See where I’m going with this?

We’ve seen now with both the current Global Financial Crisis and the Climate Change Crisis, a need for a not so invisible hand to intervene and attempt to re balance these systems, without which it is quite clear they could completely fail. In the case of the economy, failure wouldn't necessarily mean certain death, but hardships for us all no doubt. Long term climate collapse is certainly not a reality any of us would wish to leave with our children, and likewise the shortcomings of the food status quo.

Well, our food system is failing producers and consumers alike and correcting it will require governments to back local producers (just like we are our domestic banks and industries) to keep them afloat…and they have been. But rather than dishing huge support payments to industrial scale cash croppers, we should be seeding grassroots movements like local food with public funding because this movement embodies the creativity and entrepreneurship that is missing from the entitlement minded “Farmers Feed Cities” conventional agricultural community.

On the contrary, we in the local food movement are working to breach the divide between farmers and cities by bringing fresh food right from our farm into peoples homes and restaurants, as well as bringing school children and their families out to our farms to demonstrate what a positive impact we can bring to our communities by supporting small-scale ecologically minded producers.

Will this be enough, is I guess the question. Will local food ever move beyond culinary tourism and displace the processed/packaged TV dinners and the like from the dinner tables of all too many households? Is it just me, or does anyone else feel like we need to inject a bit more social justice into the culinary tourism / local food movement, which at this point in time seems to be dominated by celebrity chefs, crafty politicians, and well-to-do foodies in search of the next wave in food.

Is local food still about food security, both now and in the future? At what point will capitalizing on the popularity of culinary tourism undercut the goal of sustainable local food?

Again, don’t get me wrong: I AM a proponent of the local food movement. People that can afford it ARE just as worthy of eating good honest local organic food as not so wealthy people, but it would be great if we all could. Barrack Obama WILL BE a great President, hopefully inspiring more people to pull their heads out of the sand and stand up for what they believe in.

But isn’t the only way that real, locally grown, chemical free, and fair trade food will be equally available to all, truly, is if everyone grows their own?

No middlemen to squeeze margins. No transportation; barely a 100 paces for most back yard gardeners. Block by block markets could spring up rather than town to town and communities could almost move to moneyless society by fully embracing the beauty of barter. Geeez, I’ll be the powers that be probably would like this plan…

So let’s all grow our own food. Speaking of which, one of our best customers was out on Friday (again) to help us plant garlic. This is a lady that previous to this summer had grown very little, then grew her own successful garden this year and now, she tell us, she wants to farm full time next year. This, my friends, is what I’m talking about.

And finally, as some of you may have heard Stephen Lewis is speaking at The Village this weekend as part of a regional sustainability conference. I will look forward to hearing from anyone that is able to make it as I will not be able to. Also this weekend Kimbercote is hosting a workbee / workshop for anyone looking to practice a more active sustainability. I believe one of the features will be a permaculture workshop with Guelph’s Brad Peterson…worth looking into.

A reminder that the 21/22/23 of November is the big CSA Farming Conference in Orillia that should be quite worthwhile for anyone with an inkling of interest in food and the following weekend 28/29 is the Green Party’s weekend policy conference at Mansfield Outdoor Centre. I’ll be around both these events, ranting and raving as I always do, but if you are interested check their websites or email me for more information.

That’s it – see you soon.

Posted by Farmer Ryan

Cats and Cars

2008-11-15T12:59:00.000-05:00

Cats and cars. These are the things that seem to be pre-occupying Owen Sound City Council these days. There are parallels.

If you have a cat, or two, or seven, it's because you love their company. You like their purr, the cozy way they make you feel, and you just like to know they are there when you open the door.

Cars are similar. We're used to that familiar sound of an idling car, the way we can adjust that blast of warm air on a cold drive home, and the neat lines of cars that wait dependably for their owners to come out of the house or office.

But just like those who identify themselves as “not cat people”, those who prefer to walk or bike or take the bus or train can find themselves looked upon with suspicion by their car-loving neighbours.

The city of Owen Sound had a big meeting about its transportation master plan and people talked about inter- and intra-city transit, bike lanes and lock-ups and pedestrian safety. Consultants are presumably working away at this as we speak. But what has captured front page attention is straight from an argument over the rules for Monopoly – what does “Free Parking” really mean?

There are city policies that do not allow parking expenses to come out of tax revenue. This makes it a user pay system, however that is distributed. The mayor and many downtown business owners are concerned that, faced with a $1 per hour parking fee, customers will opt for the “free” parking at malls and big box stores.

Of course the parking at malls or Wal-Mart is far from free. It's just that we all pay for it, whether we choose to take a car or even shop there or not.

First we paid for the infrastructure that took development of formerly rural property on the edge of town. And we'll soon pay to take it right to the city's eastern boundary. You can see the spray paint on the edges of the hayfields, and the long stretches of conduit and pipe waiting to be laid. We pay to maintain miles of water mains to service the big box stores, and more miles of sewer to take the runoff from their acres of asphalt to the water treatment plant to remove the salt, rust and car fluids. Occasionally, of course, there is too much rain and it goes directly into the bay and that's a different way we pay.

Of course if you do shop at the mall or a big box store, you pay for your parking again with every single item you buy. All the snow removal, repaving, painting, lighting – the very things that the city pays for in our own downtown – are being added to your bill at the check-out. You are paying for the extra air conditioning in summer caused by the heat absorption of those big parking lots, and replacing shopping carts, curbs and light standards damaged by other drivers.

Don't think for a moment that you as a customer can escape contributing to every bit of the expense side of the ledger of big retailers. You are even paying toward their “charitable” efforts, but that's another column.

Parking spaces outnumber cars at least three to one. Building codes and municipal by-laws demand parking spaces, and retail lots are still being built for some kind of mythical eternal Boxing Day.

What kind of return do taxpayers get for those decisions and investments by our governments? I've been trying all day to find out how much tax is paid on those big private parking lots which represent so much of some retailer's “footprint”. Perhaps we could charge a parking lot surcharge and invest it in creative, affordable public transit or “transit on demand” services that would benefit the whole community.

For now, if you have to drive your car downtown, park it in the lot we own on the west harbour or one of the big retail lots you pay to service, and walk from there.

I'm afraid you've missed the public cat discussion, but there are some interesting meetings ahead – November 25 at 6:30 on downtown parking and December 1 at 7pm on the expansion of WalMart, both at city hall.

If you have bigger concerns than cats or cars, the Grey Bruce Coalition for Peace and Justice is holding a community forum on poverty at the library in Owen Sound on November 25 at 7 p.m. That's where I'll be.

Posted by AnneFS

The Five Stages of Collapse

2008-11-13T13:03:00.000-05:00

This long piece by Dmitry Orlov, a Russian who watched the collapse of the regime there in the 80s, is quite interesting given that we collectively seem to be well into stage 2 of his 5 stages which he gives as:-
1) Financial collapse
2) Commercial collapse
3) Political collapse
4) Social collapse
5) Cultural collapse
What I found even more interesting however was his final few sentences in which he gives the 5 stages of response to the above:-

1) Living without needing much money.
2) Provide for basic needs.
3) Local self government.
4) Cohesive community, mutual responsibility.
5) Classical human values.
Sort of sound familiar doesn’t it, back to basics, local government and community pulling together, value people and work not money! Seems to me that some here have been saying this sort of thing long before the current mess the “rich and powerful” have gotten us into…….

See http://www.energybulletin.net/node/47157

Posted by Rural

Transforming Our Economy - Introduction

2008-11-13T00:22:00.000-05:00

It seems that the news these days is dominated by story after story about the impending economic recession. The stories generally fall into two categories. Most are just plain bad news with no analysis of the problem and no suggested solution. Even worse, the rest are denial that there really is any serious problem, and what little there might be will “correct itself” quickly with a few tweaks of the economic and monetary tools at our disposal.

As both of these approaches are seriously flawed, I’ve decided to bring some light to the issue from my gathered understanding of the situation over a number of years. Yes, the situation has been developing for a number of years; many in fact, and the refusal of mainstream economists and politicians to admit it will soon be seen as opportunism at it’s worst. To be fair, it is also part stupidity. After all, how can we expect politicians trained by the Fraser Institute to even remotely understand how to reform economics to the service of people, or even understand that there is a need to?

Over the next several weeks I will be posting a series of articles on the current economic downturn. I will investigate what it means to local Bruce-Grey citizens and and how we might turn this challenge into an opportunity.

Warning; this will not be an encouraging series for those who base their sense of well being on material possessions and their status on financial wealth. It will however, be enlightening for those who wish to understand how we got here and how we can move forward to a much better society based on community, responsibility, and quality over quantity.

This series will roughly cover the following topics:

1. Current economic foundations & why they no longer work.
2. Peak oil and resource limits.
3. The steady state economy and political implications.
4. Re-localization and global economics.
5. What we must do now.

I will attempt to maintain a balance between layman's terms and concepts that the average person will understand, while presenting some new ideas that may challenge even the most seasoned economic theorist.

I will use a format that focuses on brevity, referencing links that you can follow to research more details.

While I have alluded to the subject at hand a number of times over the years, I have admittedly procrastinated about writing on the specifics. This is not a comfortable subject to write about and no doubt some will immediately write me off as extremist. I suppose that is your choice, but as I have watched the economic events of the past few years unfold generally as I expected and predicted, I think I have earned a hearing.

It is interesting that I’m beginning this process the day before three significant events in Grey County. All three events are related to the topic at hand, but they approach it from distinctly different angles. One is about “talking”, one about “promoting”, and the other about “doing”. The “talking” event is the Go Green at Blue Environmental Forum which I hope will turn talk into action in a way that few forums do. Judging by the quality of people involved, this is distinctly possible. The “promoting” event is a 100-mile business showcase at Bootjack Ranch near Durham. Here you will be able to see and purchase from a number of 100-mile vendors who are already becoming part of the economic solution. The “doing” event is the Kimbercote Fall Workshop Weekend in the Beaver Valley. This is a decidedly hands-on event featuring activities ranging from food to social justice. I must say that I am partial to the “doing” (a preference that has landed me in trouble on at least one occasion) as the time for talk is running short.

And that is why I’m breaking the silence on the difficult times ahead, because we must start doing; and doing very differently if we are to avoid some of the pain ahead.

Stay tuned...more to come shortly. In the meantime, check out this closely related posting by Rural: The Five Stages of Collapse, http://www.shanejolley.com/2008/11/13/five-stages-collapse .

Is 100% Renewable Power Achievable?

2008-11-06T13:04:00.000-05:00

A little while ago I was made aware of the report “Ontario’s Green Future” by Ontario Clean Air Alliance Research Inc which makes the dubious claim that “Ontario can obtain virtually 100% of its grid-supplied electricity from renewable sources by 2027”.

It is unfortunate that this small phrase in the report is the one that has been picked up and promoted, for it is not strictly true. Whilst the report is mostly a critique of OPA and more particularly their plans for the use of Nuclear power over the next few decades it does make some valid points about the use of micro generation to decrease our reliance upon centralized power. To enable them to make the above claim they do not consider CHP (usually gas fired combined heat and power units) to be “grid supplied” power even though these units would be normally grid CONNECTED.

This small but significant detail gives a wrong impression about an otherwise quite useful document. It does go on at great length slamming the OPA and nuclear energy, particularly the costing of said power some of which may have some validity but the real important stuff may have got lost in the rhetoric. I will try and itemize some of the good stuff and explain why it should be given more consideration.

1) “In distributed systems, the emphasis is on meeting electricity needs in the most efficient and lowest cost manner possible. Many smaller generation sources located near centres of electricity demand are used instead of a handful of large power stations. The result is a system that wastes much less energy during generation, transmission and use, and that thereby reduces costs and polluting emissions.”

This is very true, the line losses for transmitting hydro over long distances is considerable and generating our power locally makes sense even if not “green” power. In order to have sufficient flexibility in the system to allow for maintenance, sudden peaks in load and efficient use of the various outputs these units must SHARE both their load and their output and thus must be GRID CONNECTED.

2)” Pay electricity consumers to install small-scale combined heat and power and tri-generation (heating, cooling and electricity) plants in their apartments, condominiums, shopping and recreation centers, hospitals, office buildings and factories. Once again, the more electricity that consumers self-generate, the lower the demand for grid-supplied electricity and the easier it will be to meet 100% of our demand for grid-supplied electricity from renewable sources”

As I said above the CHP concept is a good one and if we can use the same equipment to generate building heating and some or all of the hydro requirements for that building simultaneously then it is a win win situation. BUT please note that very few of these units will be run on “renewable” or “green” sources of energy. The majority would be gas fired, infinitely better than coal and some will say better than nuclear but still not renewable OR green! I am not sure that we have to PAY users (particularly commercial owners) to install these units but certainly there should be incentives such as interest free loans and payment for excess power fed back into the grid.

3)” Aggressively procure renewable electricity supplies from individuals, cooperatives, First Nations communities, local electric utilities, private sector developers and the Province of Quebec.”

We must indeed look at all potential sources of power and importing hydroelectric power from Quebec is far preferable to coal fired power from Ohio. How much of that can be “renewable” power is debatable but potential for hydro electric (and wind) is considerable If we can get the hydro from the source to the major users (or move the major users to the source?) without major line losses due to distance.

The report says “To fully exploit Ontario’s vast renewable potential, we need to build a smart, integrated power grid that can quickly balance multiple power sources with rising and falling demand.” The grid, particularly the east west grid must indeed be upgraded to accommodate new sources but we have recently seen the amount of resistance generated from transmission line upgrades from Bruce nuclear and the Sunset coast wind farms.

4)” Ontario’s total wind and biomass renewable electricity potential is over 1,800 billion kWh. Therefore, Ontario could meet 100% of its electricity needs from renewable sources by harnessing an additional 5.5% of its wind and biomass renewable electricity potential.”

Ah yes the “wind is the total answer” argument! There are several misconceptions than some folks seem to be unable to see past in regard to wind power not the least of all that the “potential” is not equal to the PRACTICAL potential. The second common mistake made in calculating the potential output of a wind farm is the recognition that a typical wind generator produces somewhere about 30% of its capacity over a given period of time (due to wind variations) but then saying therefore 3 turbines will produce 90% of our requirements. Not if they are all windless at the same time! Even large wind farms many miles apart have the “potential” (there is that word again) to ALL be stationary or producing minimal power if a big high settles over Ontario for a few days. What then?

The report also notes that only about 5% of the “potential” exists in the “south” of Ontario (where the power is needed) the rest being in the “north”. No doubt wind should be a PART of the mix but let us not ignore the potential problems in our rush to go green.

Regarding biomass hydro production one local council is actively pursuing this as a better way to dispose of biosolids and septage but is having little luck with getting ANY other level of government to assist with the upfront costs of installing such a system. A special tip o the hat the Chatsworh Township for continuing to pursue this option. Several large farms in Canada are now running their entire operation on hydro produced from animal “waste”, there is indeed lots of “potential” for farm livestock operations to add to the supply in this manner.

5) “ 64 potential offshore wind power sites in the Great Lakes have been identified, these sites could support 34,500 MW of wind power capacity”

The same arguments apply to this “potential” however in my view although more expensive to build both the towers and the infrastructure, this would have a great deal less impact upon the population of rural residents who must suffer this intrusion upon their scenic countryside, not to mention the increasing evidence that living close to one of these installations may have upon the health of some individuals. Certainly Great Britain has the majority of their wind generation “off shore”, the shallow waters off to our west would be well suited for this, it would however change those Sunset Views so strongly promoted!

6) “[we] estimated a potential for clean local power of 11,400 megawatts [MW], of which 3,000 MW would be produced without added fossil fuel by recycling wasted energy from industrial activities such as steel mills, chemical plants, refineries, carbon black production, gas compressor stations and steam pressure drop.”

Indeed the “potential” for generating power from “waste” industrial heat or other energy sources may well be higher than that and whilst it does not necessarily reduce our use of fossil fuels it may well make better use of those we are using. In so far as industrial use of energy perhaps we should move large energy using industries OUT of the highly populated, but low energy source areas of southern Ontario, to places further north where hydro electric energy could supply these large amounts of power thus leaving more available for those remaining. True this may require some residents to also move north out of the big cities but is that necessarily a bad thing, there is more to Ontario than the Golden Triangle after all. Who knows away from Toronto or Hamilton they may even be able to afford to build an energy efficient residence!

7) Apart from mentioning that the OPA has a goal of 50 billion kWh from hydro electric the report does not even touch upon this far superior form of renewable energy, the potential for micogeneration from hydro electric is substantial. Before this can take place however there needs to be a change in policy from the MOE and other government departments with jurisdiction over our rivers and streams. As things sit now it is impossible for an individual to get a permit to dam a stream in order to install a small generator, in fact the ministry is actively pursuing the REMOVAL of existing private dams with that potential. Whilst we must recognize that there may be some impact upon fish habitat by such projects, it must also be recognized that ANY project will impact the natural surroundings in some manner and a REASONABLE balance must be found. Our local streams and waterfalls could provide a good source of microgeneration 24 hrs a day 7 days a week.

8) This report does not say much about energy use reduction through personal, community or corporate energy efficiency, or changes in the way we do things, other that the reference to GDP as mentioned above. I think almost all of us are in agreement that we as a society are wasteful of hydro and need to reduce that waste. Each of us can do a little individually but as I have said before it is the corporate sector that can really make a huge difference. Buying an energy efficient fridge would, whilst a great move, be a expensive but miniscule contribution compared with say turning off one row of lights in your local grocery or department store. (note that the building and labour codes probably dictate minimum levels of lighting for such operations, perhaps we need to revisit such regulations with conservation in mind.) Take a look at all the outdoor commercial signs, many of them on all night, next time you drive into town, as for the mega stores and enormous indoor shopping malls heating and lighting loads, well……………..!

Finally just a few words about this from the report:-

“As a result of Ontario’s historic failure to promote energy efficiency, our electricity productivity (Gross Domestic Product or GDP per kWh) is much lower than those of North America’s leading knowledge-based economies.”

What the H… does our monetary GDP have to do with the efficiency of the electrical supply? This is a total red herring in my view, our climate, the fact that we manufacture stuff rather than “trade” knowledge, the type of products made etc have an enormous impact upon this. If you want to compare hydro “efficency”, use per population in similar areas of climate and production than you may have a case. I DO believe we are indeed wasteful in our use of electricity but kWh against GDP is not the way to measure it!

In short we have the “potential” to do many things but we must be careful to separate what is potentially achievable from what is practically achievable, over stating the possible or misleading statements about the “potential” does not help the cause.

Posted by Rural

Need for Electoral Reform Surfaces Again...and Again

2008-11-03T16:32:00.001-05:00

Bruce-Grey-Owen Sound has the distinction of being higher than the national average in at least one thing. Two percent more of us voted in the federal election.

Locally, about half of that 61.9% of eligible voters chose the status quo. Whether that was because of the record of our local representative and belief in what he can do for us in the future, or because of trust in the sitting prime minister to look after our best interests, we'll never know.

This is what we do know. More than half of those who cast a ballot in Bruce-Grey-Owen Sound did not choose the Miller/Harper team. 62% of Canadians did not vote for Mr. Harper. And most disturbing of all, 41% of eligible Canadian voters did not vote at all – a record low.

We'll hear dozens of opinions on the subject of voter turnout over the next few weeks, and once again blame will be laid on the young, the apathetic, and the selfish. I'd like to posit that it may be the terrified, the angry and the frustrated that chose to stay at home this time.

Without question, Canadians knew they were being manipulated in the very calling of this election. Mr. Harper knew the North American economy was in difficulty and that in another year the heat might be unbearable, so he watched the polls and jumped through the first window of opportunity. After months of preparation and strategy, he then executed an extremely personal campaign.

Two things struck me about the Conservative platform in this election. The first was that it was subtitled “Stephen Harper's Plan for Canada” and it contained an extraordinary number of pictures of Mr. Harper – twenty-two. The 307 other individuals seeking to represent their neighbours on the Conservative side of the House were oddly invisible, as if only one person were really required to manage the country.

The second thing I noticed about the Conservative platform was that there was not a single mention of global warming, nor climate change. Not until page 22 did the word “environment” appear, and then it was in the same sentence as “our vast, untapped Arctic”.

Polls in 2007 and earlier this year indicated that issues of the environment and climate change had become leading issues for Canadians and a sizeable majority of Canadians would be willing to have the economy grow at a "significantly slower rate" to reduce global warming. These were never the issues the Conservatives, with their base in the tar sands, wanted to discuss in an election. By releasing their platform in the last few days of the campaign, they were able to capitalize on fears of financial instability and leave Canada's responsibility for the planet's future health right out of the picture.

Do Canadians see their vote as their power to send talented people to parliament to represent their interests and work on all the challenges that concern them - employment, health care, pensions, agriculture, environment, social services, war and economy?

Almost a million people voted for a Green platform, but when parliament resumes their views will remain unrepresented. Every Conservative supporter in Montreal and a quarter of a million Conservatives in Toronto remain similarly without a voice for their point of view. Over a million more Canadians voted for the NDP than the Bloc, yet the block holds thirteen more seats than the NDP today. How can this be representative democracy?

In the Toronto riding of Parkdale-High Park, voters had to choose between two highly-qualified, community leaders – Gerrard Kennedy, Liberal and Peggy Nash, NDP. In any system of proportional representation used by the vast majority of world democracies, these two experienced and respected individuals would have been high on their respective parties' list of candidates. Given the popular vote across the country, this morning both Mr. Kennedy and Ms. Nash would be packing their bags for Ottawa to put their talents to work on the serious issues that face every Canadian.

In most other democracies the vote of every single citizen is counted towards representation in the government. People do not have to choose between supporting a respected local candidate and a capable national leader who may be from a different party.

The Conservative party is unlikely to take the lead in reforming the electoral system while they still dream of the unfettered power of a majority. We must push the members of the opposition parties to move for proportional representation, not for their own benefit, but for ours.

Our neighbours, and our children, need to know their participation in democracy – their vote - makes a difference to their future.

Posted by AnneFS

Demand Government Support for Community Priorities

2008-11-03T16:29:00.001-05:00

In 2009 you may not be asked to vote on who will represent you at any level.

Municipal elections will be in 2010, provincial in 2011 and federal...well, according to the fixed election legislation that didn't appear to apply this time, it is scheduled for October 15, 2012.

So in this breathing space when everyone is supposed to be doing his or her job rather than auditioning for it, let's think together about what we want our representatives to do for us.

It seems it is at the municipal level that citizens are most vocal about their demands, and expectations that these will be met are highest. The mayors and councillors get letters, phone calls, and deputations and everywhere they go - their places of business, the grocery store, even when they are just trying to enjoy “off duty” time with their families- people feel the need to ask about the issues. Municipalities deal with things that effect people every single day of their lives – the pothole or broken sidewalk in front of their houses, their garbage, the trees in the park, the bus they take to work, the school their children attend – and people want something done.

But municipalities of all sizes also include big capital enterprises like water plants that require the participation of senior levels of government. It's rare that even the smallest bridge is built any more with only local tax money. How do the provincial and federal government decide which projects are funded, and who contributes what share?

It is popular campaign rhetoric that we will receive more if we elect a representative who will be on the government benches, no matter how far back. Between 1997 and 2004, Bruce-Grey-Owen Sound had representatives sitting on the government side of both the Ontario legislature and the Canadian House of Commons. Although neither Ovid nor Bill were very big fish in their respective parties, they worked well together.
So one might forgive you for assuming the Chretien-Harris years must have been a golden age of government money flowing into Grey-Bruce with new projects developed all over the region. But far too often we heard that the feds were willing but the provincial government wouldn't pony up, or vice versa. It remains Mr. Miller's refrain, made all the easier by the fact that he and Mr. Murdoch can both tell us that the McGuinty Liberals that are unwilling to invest in the region.

It's time for citizens to do their own homework.

First, we need to ask ourselves what we need. Jobs, transportation, energy, food, education, infrastructure – where are the gaps? We cannot rely merely on the reports of consultants hired by the government. They are often working on a traditional model of business expansion that may not hold in the years ahead. Our priorities as residents of the region may be quite different.
.
The Walkerton Clean Water Centre, for example, was created to be “a world-class institute dedicated to safe and secure drinking water for the people of Ontario” and it will be a job and money-generating facility for the area.

Second, we need to understand our resources. If you're a fan of the show “LOST”, you'll remember that one of the first things everyone did after their plane crashed on the island was salvage what they could and take an inventory of what they had. We're not in a disaster situation, but how wise would it be if we really took stock of what and who is in our region and could make full use of our talents and capital today?

Third, we need to understand clearly which level of government is responsible for what, and then tell them what we need them to do for us. “Lobbying” has become a dirty word, but citizens working together to ask for positive change is a legitimate and essential civic exercise .

One example.

With all respect to the workers at PPG, if the company has contracts to fill, it is most likely they will be filling them in the United States or China. If Mr. Miller were able to negotiate a rescue for that plant, it would be a temporary fix at best. Let's look upon that plant and its workers as a resource, and ask Mr. Miller to look for federal investment money for a facility of use both to current and future workers and residents of the area. Mr. Noble had suggestions about energy distribution from the plant into the grid. Mr. Hibma talked about local food processing on the site, and others have spoken of greenhouses for year-round food production. Are these reasonable alternatives?

Let's spend 2009 doing our homework and ask our elected representatives to work with us on priorities we set for our own communities.

Posted by AnneFS

Province Ignoring Small Business & Green Job Sector

2008-10-30T00:20:00.000-04:00

IGNORING SMALL BUSINESS AND THE GREEN JOBS SECTOR IS A CRITICAL MISS BY THE MCGUINTY GOVERNMENT IN THIS CHALLENGING ECONOMIC TIME.

TORONTO, ON (October 22nd, 2008) – Green Party of Ontario Leader Frank de Jong said today that the McGuinty government is failing to provide leadership and innovative solutions in this challenging economic time. The Green Party called for more support for small businesses and investment in the green job sector as a sustainable solution to improve Ontario’s economy.

“We need a more diversified economy to provide greater stability during tough economic times, and that means investing in Main Streets across this province,” said de Jong. Small and medium sized enterprises account for 60 percent of private sector employment.

A recent study by Canadian Policy Research Networks shows that 23.7 percent of young Canadians are underemployed, the worst showing across 19 OECD countries. “Generalized investments to stimulate the economy will likely lead to more McJobs and underemployment” says Shane Jolley Deputy Leader. “Now more than ever we need strong local economies with vibrant small businesses and local farms”.

The Green Party called on the government to maintain a balanced budget by ending unfair subsidies for large businesses and scaling back its plans for spending $40 billion on nuclear energy. “When the province is facing a deficit, it is irresponsible to spend taxpayer money on projects that are not needed and historically run over budget,” said de Jong. “Spending our tax dollars on nuclear is fiscally irresponsible when there are better options.”

“We can create thousands of jobs in Ontario in the green energy sector by reducing taxes for individuals and businesses, investing in energy conservation and demand management programs and rewarding businesses and home owners who reduce their consumption and invest in renewable energy,” stated Deputy Leader Judy Smith Torrie, citing a recent study that California’s energy efficiency policies created 1.5 million new jobs.

The Green Party challenged the government to mitigate the effects of the economic slow down by reducing personal income and business taxes; and, by creating incentives for investing in green infrastructure and energy efficiency. “We need to boost the manufacturing sector by making Ontario attractive to green technology research and development,” observed Smith Torrie. “Ontario has the manufacturing industry, the skilled and educated labour force, and the raw materials to become a global leader in green energy production.”

Politics...A Nasty Business

2008-10-17T00:18:00.000-04:00

I often hear people asking why there are no honest politicians. In fact, there are but we don't hear much about them and there certainly aren't enough of them.

Having entered the political arena myself, I have some idea why this is the case. It seems that many who enter the system with good intentions soon sucumb to the lowest common denominator in order to survive politically. Those who will not stoop to this level soon bail out rather than compromise or have their reputation trashed by their opponents.

Lately, I too have had to seriously consider packing it in on politics due to the unethical actions of a handful of people. Unless you've been under a rock since May, you know that I have spent my summer defending myself against distorted facts and unethical behavior by some individuals - including some in the media - regarding a charge against me.

When yesterday the Crown threw out the charge against me but the Sun Times still printed an article implying my guilt, it left me again wondering if my work here for this region is worth the abuse it has drawn.

What is it that makes people feel so threatened by someone like myself who is simply working for positive change? What makes people attack their others with different ideas instead of trying to understand them? Is it that some people just can't accept the truth? Maybe they can't admit that they were wrong? Or maybe it's pure selfishness. Do I threaten someone's financial interest? In the case of the Sun Times, is it just a crass attempt to sell more papers?

I don't know the answers to these questions but I'm putting all attackers on notice that I am not going away. I often think about my kids and whether they will get caught in the crossfire. At the end of the day I have faith that they will commend me for not giving up; for fighting for a better future for them.

If you're wondering why politicians and others looking for unethical advantage throw mud, it's because mud sticks. The recent behavior and subsequent result of the recent federal election is proof of this.

I however think that at the core of it, you, the citizens of Ontario and Bruce/Grey are smarter than that. That's why I'm sticking around. Prove me correct.

Sensible Energy Policy

2008-10-17T00:14:00.000-04:00

The following recommendations from the Ontario Clean Air Alliance to the Ontario government should be taken seriously and acted upon. As the recommendations are based on sound reasoning, the only reason not to follow through on them would be due to pressure from the nuclear lobby. A summary of the report is reprinted here:

"Ontario can obtain 100% of its grid-supplied electricity from renewable sources by 2027 if Energy and Infrastructure Minister George Smitherman adopts the recommendations in the Ontario Clean Air Alliance’s new report, Ontario’s Green Future.

The report’s three key recommendations are: build on success; take the lid off clean power; and make nuclear the last choice, not the first.

Build on success
Ontario’s Standard Offer Program for Renewable Power has been a huge success, attracting more projects in one year than the Ontario Power Authority had projected would be available in 10. It’s time to extend this simple and effective program, which pays a fixed price for each kilowatt-hour (kWh) of new supply, to energy efficiency and clean combined heat and power projects.

Take the lid off clean power
We also need to make the Standard Offer Program model more robust by removing arbitrary project size limits and raising the standard offer price to reflect the true comparative cost of obtaining power from new nuclear units and associated transmission systems.

Make nuclear the last choice, not the first
Nuclear power projects have a long history of massive cost overruns in Ontario. No other electricity generation projects, whether they be wind, water, solar or natural gas, are allowed to pass their capital cost overruns on to ratepayers and taxpayers. It is time to end this and other costly special deals for nuclear and to make nuclear projects compete fairly with other generation sources.

Ontario should pass a Nuclear Cost Responsibility Act that makes it illegal for nuclear capital cost overruns to be passed on to ratepayers or taxpayers. This will prevent any additions to the $18 billion “stranded” nuclear debt that is still being paid off by Ontario ratepayers."

The Ontario’s Green Future report can be downloaded from:
http://www.ontariosgreenfuture.ca/Ontarios_Green_Future.pdf

When is the Best Time?

2008-09-23T16:33:00.000-04:00

When is the Best time to plant a tree? 30 years ago. When is the next best time to plant a tree? Today. When is the Best time to switch to a sustainable economy? 30 years ago. When is the next best time? Today.

We have a Corporate, Consumerist, Cancerous economy that is destroying our environment, devouring the middle class and celebrating growth and greed in a manner that threatens our survival as local communities and a global civilization. It would have been a good idea to begin the transition to a sustainable economy back in the ‘70’s when the Science Council of Canada came out with their study “Canada as a Conserver Society”. We did not. Surely we should start today.

Instead, when the greedy cancer cells in the stock market over reach themselves, our current leaders and our central banks rush to pour our money by the billions into their gaping mouths and bottomless stomachs. More growth for the rich, more public debt for the people. And our current leaders threaten the disappearing middle class, the employed workers with economic disaster if they don’t feed Wall Street and Bay Street.

Now is the time to make the transition to a sustainable economy. How about a fund to support workers and their families who lose jobs as the Corporate, consumerist, Cancerous economy collapses. How about a fund to invest in sustainable technologies. How about a fund to invest in training workers for the green collar jobs in our communities.

Don’t let them tell you it can’t be done.

Overnight our current leaders can find $180,000,000,000.00 (count the zeros - one hundred and eighty BILLION dollars) to bail out their buddies on Bay Street and Wall Street. They tell us this will save us. They are wrong. It wastes our current resource removing a small obstacle from the tracks of a train racing off a cliff. Today’s obstacle is a warning to stop the train and turn it around. To understand why our current leaders will be shoveling in coal (or bundles of taxpayers dollars) forever read “A Short History of Civilization” by Ronald Wright. The elites in society never get it. Their elite position depends on propping up the past not embracing the future. They’ll keep driving the train long after it has left the tracks.

I want a future I can be proud to pass on to our children. Let’s get off this train and start building a path to a sustainable, equitable and community based future. We may have to walk that path and share rides to get there. But I’d rather get there on my own two feet than go over a cliff in the padded seats of this train.

Tony McQuail

Conservation & Efficiency Before Technology

2008-09-21T16:37:00.002-04:00

I recently attended a Symposium sponsored by the Centre for Applied Renewable Energy in Brussels, Ontario. The title was “Merging with the Green Economy” and it was an encouraging look at opportunities for rural renewable energy products and Green Collar job possibilities in Rural Communities. I particularly liked David Blaney’s comment “our sons and daughters can pursue their interests and stay local if we push renewables.”

It was also exciting to hear John Wilkinson, the keynote speaker and Ontario Minister of Research and Innovation, say that we need to rejoin all the other species on the planet in living in a sustainable fashion. He then went on to say that photosynthesis and metabolism are what makes the rest of the world work and that we need to find our way out of the darkness of the choice we made 150 years ago when we began becoming so dependent on fossil fuels. This is good stuff and I’m glad to hear it.

But I did have a concern as I reflect on the symposium. Most of the talk was about technology. Now I agree we need to be shifting to biofuels, and solar panels and wind generators. We need to be making a transition to a renewably fueled society. But I also agree with Richard Heinberg, who in his book, “The Party’s Over”, says there is no one silver bullet that can replace our current level of Fossil Fuel use, only silver BB’s, each a small contributor to meeting our energy requirements. We need to
be thinking about innovative ways to organize our society and economy so we need less energy NOW, not just working on new energy sources and more stuff. The more we can lower our energy useage, the greater our success in shifting to renewables.

As an example, consider a situation where four people are driving daily from a rural township to jobs in a local town. If each gets a hybrid car that doubles the mileage they are currently getting with their existing cars and each continues to drive to work they will cut their fuel needs by 50%. However, they will have the cost of buying new cars and the manufacture of those cars will take a lot of energy and resources. On the other hand, if the 4 decide to car pool to town they can cut their energy use by 75% RIGHT NOW with no additional cost for new cars and no additional energy and resource use to manufacture them.

To make a transition to a sustainable society we need to be thinking creatively about how to encourage and support that type of behavior AND how to design an economy so that it doesn’t crash and burn when the demand for private automobiles drops or products are made so durable that they last decades. We need to develop ways that we as individuals can work together to reduce our energy needs and where we as a society can encourage frugality, durability and simplicity without putting half the population on unemployment. If we replace the cancerous growth of our throwaway consumer society maybe one of the benefits could be a 20 hour work week. Wouldn’t it be great to have that extra time for our families and communities as well as a sustainable economy too!

Tony McQuail

Been to Council Lately?

2008-09-12T16:41:00.000-04:00

Have you ever been to a meeting of your local council lately?

If not, it's an eye opener let me tell you...but also a 'feel gooder' seeing democracy play out in front of you, as contorted as it might be.

Proposals coming forth to the Town of the Blue Mountains last night ranged from a townhouse development downtown to an eco-agricultural residential community on the periphery of Thornbury to a new dog kennel operation being proposed by our neighbours! Good thing we’re dog lovers…

Not surprisingly the different projects all had the proponents and opponents, to a degree, with some people simply voicing their opposition to ‘change’.

My feeling is that change is a good thing, an inevitable thing, but that at the very least we deserve and should in fact demand progressive change that will meet the needs of today while doing our best to address the prospects of future generations.

For the most part I think that the TOBM, backed by increasingly progressive municipal and provincial regulatory frameworks, is trying to set a course for sustainable development. Ultimately though, it will be our willingness to embrace new forms of green building, densification around existing municipal services and creative multi-use projects that address everything from energy to waste, transportation to food that will allow us to steer the ship of civilization in a sustainable direction.

We’re not their yet. Some of us are still clinging to strict notions of the single family home, big garage for the SUV to get to the Supersentre for a mass consumption of cheap goods lifestyle.

Unbeknownst to some, sustainable development is not something that comes in a box that we can buy at an everyday low price. A better future will involve a revaluation of what is really important to our lives and shifting towards new notions of well-off means: healthy food without nutrient deficiencies or chemical externalities; communities that function like large families, not gated communities built on the basis of exclusion; and efficient municipal services that empower people and protect the environment that supports us...for example.

While we might feel powerless to change policies at the national or provincial level more than every 4 or less years (such as why we continue to subsidize industrial farms that sell their goods below cost of production to compete on the world market, rather than support small organic farms that are producing healthier food for local consumption) your local council probably has open meetings weekly.

So the next time you get a ‘Notice of Adjustment’ in the mail or see something that catches your eye in the newspaper, head down to your local council chambers for the meeting and have your voice heard. You’ll feel good about it, probably bump into some of your friendly neighbours and be able to keep tabs on what kinds of new developments are taking place in your community. And forget the Cineplex, for the money these open council meetings may be the best heart pounding entertainment value around.

Posted by Farmer Ryan

And We're Off...

2008-09-09T00:12:00.000-04:00

As you will know by now, the writ has been dropped and we are into another federal election campaign.

There are many important issues that must be addressed in this election including climate change, a potential economic slowdown, and most recently, issues of democracy and accountability that have been raised through the actions of the Harper government.

I thank you far your strong support in past elections. Together we have brought Green support in Bruce-Grey-Owen Sound from a mere 4% to a precedent setting 33% of the popular vote. Now we need to take it over the top and send the first elected Green to represent us in Ottawa.

Dick Hibma was selected to carry the Green banner for us at our AGM early in the spring. Now I'm asking all of you, my past supporters, to rally behind him to make a Green win a reality. Dick has been a good friend and a solid Green supporter. He adheres to the key values of the Green Party and his credentials are excellent. Dick served on Owen Sound City Council for 13 years, as well as serving in other important roles such as the chair of Conservation Ontario.

Now Dick needs you.

Whatever your talents, abilities, and time availability, you can have a significant impact on the outcome of this election. There are many ways to get involved and help send the message of sustainability to Ottawa.
First of all, you can drop into the new campaign office at 833 2nd Ave. E., across from Owen Sound City Hall and check the “wall of action”. There will always be jobs, small and large that you can take on in your spare time.
Second, call 519-416-4220 and talk to Jeff Brownridge, Dick’s campaign manager about what role you can fill.
Finally, you can request a sign and make a donation to the campaign. Signs will be ready shortly, and donations are needed to run a fully funded winning campaign. Donations can be made by cheque or through the campaign website at http://dickhibma.com/ .

I firmly believe that we have the best candidate by far in this election, and I will be investing my time in seeing Dick elected on October 14th.
I trust you’ll join me in furthering the causes of democracy, sustainability, and social justice by giving what you can in time, energy, and finances.

Yours in a green future.

Partisan Abuse of Power

2008-09-08T16:44:00.000-04:00

Before my editor has a chance to add it to my credentials at the end of this column, I'll tell you up front that I was the campaign manager for the Green Party candidate, Shane Jolley, in the last provincial election. I also worked for Sebastian Ostertag when he ran federally for the NDP. And when I was still too young to vote, I helped in Alan Lawrence's campaign at the Ontario Progressive Conservative leadership convention when Bill Davis won the day.

So all my political cards are now on the table.

Only once in my voting life can I remember putting my X beside the name of a candidate who became our representative. Richard Allen became the Minister of Colleges and Universities and took a considerable amount of heat from long-time party members who were frustrated that party policies were not all being turned into government legislation. Richard would patiently remind us that he was now a member of a government that was elected to act in the interests of all the people of Ontario, not just those of our own political stripe.

I thought of his principled stand when I heard CBC radio's investigation into a meeting between Natural Resources minister Gary Lunn and lobbyists representing, among others, restaurants with drive-throughs. The next day, the ministry's Idle Free Zone website was withdrawn for months for important changes, like the removal of any reference to premature deaths from air pollution and a change of recommended idling limits from 10 seconds to a minute.

Assuming that the original site was based on solid research and was posted at taxpayers' expense for the protection of the Canadian people, what changed in the course of a meeting between food industry lobbyists and the Minister? The same minister was involved in the firing a government geologist for not using the phrase “Canada's New Government” in his correspondence and dismissing Canada's nuclear safety watchdog when her recommendations didn't suit the government agenda.
For whom is the government working?

Whose interests were at heart in the writing of a recently leaked Conservative Party plan to end a program funding the promotion of Canadian culture abroad? Having cut specialized transport of touring art exhibits and funding for any film of which it doesn't approve, the Conservative government now feels Canadian ballet companies and exhibits of the Canadian Museum of Civilization should not be shared with anyone outside Canada. And they seem particularly afraid of journalists speaking abroad, even those many Canadians hold in high esteem - Avi Lewis (called a “general radical”) and “left-wing” Gwynn Dyer. These decisions reflect very partisan and anti-cultural views.

But perhaps the most vexingly partisan act of late has been close to home. This week, for the fourth time in as many weeks, we've received a piece of mail from Larry Miller, MP for Bruce-Grey-Owen Sound. His constituency staff, who are told that part of their job is to help Larry get re-elected, tried to convince callers that these mailings were paid for by the Conservative Party. It is easy to understand why they would make this mistake, because the literature looks and reads just like a campaign leaflet.

To his credit, Mr. Miller admitted that the thousands of dollars spent on this material came from the taxpayers of Grey and Bruce. Mr. Miller claimed that the expense was justified – this was a way of informing residents of the government's actions and getting public opinion on the issues.

In the summer. Four times. In four separate mailings.

I'm all for politicians seeking input from citizens, but everything about these “surveys” smells of haste to spend while it can be done at taxpayers' expense – an election in the wind. There is no new information or direction; the messages are self-congratulating, fear mongering and childishly insulting to their main opposition.

If Mr. Miller wants to know what we care about in Grey-Bruce, or how we feel about the job he and the Conservative government are doing for us, why didn't he just ask us himself? One well-crafted message from our own MP with local and national questions would do it. Our residents have plenty of opinions and creative ideas. And he could have saved us the cost of three of the four mailings.

When the election is called, I'll weigh the issues of the day, assess the platform of the parties and ask questions of the local candidates before I cast my vote. But when the counting is over, I expect every elected member of parliament to act in the interests of all Canadian citizens and not just those who supported their campaigns.

Posted by AnneFS

The Biodiversity Imperitive

2008-09-04T16:55:00.001-04:00

When one tugs at a single thing in nature, he finds it attached to the rest of the world. ~John Muir

When we first looked at our house in Owen Sound, one of its appeals was a beautiful green view from the kitchen window. There is a small back lawn and then a steep hill covered in lovely green plants. Most of which, it turned out, were goutweed.
Formally known as Aegopodium podagraria , this groundcover spreads enthusiastically, both by seeds and by underground tentacles called rhizomes. Every gardener reading this will be groaning by now, recognizing the unending battle we have had to introduce any other plant to the yard. We have long since ceded the victory to the goutweed.

In our backyard, this is nothing more than a cosmetic issue, and to my eyes the view is still a beautiful mish-mash of green. But aggressive, invasive plant species and monocultures can be far more of a problem in other settings.

Purple loosestrife, officially known as lythrum salicaria, was introduced to North America as a garden plant by early settlers and came over in muddy ballast water in sailing ships. With upwards of two million seeds per plant, it cheerfully spread far and wide. You've seen it as you drive along by the edges of wetlands – three to six feet tall with spikes of dense pink-purple flowers. But the next year when you drove by, you may have noticed that there was no wetland – only a huge patch of purple loosestrife.
Gone are the cattails that bound heavy metals and took them out of the environment . And the two or three hundred or more other species of plants, insects, reptiles, amphibians, birds and even mammals who used to inhabit the wetland?
Moved on. Or...didn't.

In Saugeen Shores this spring, town council made the very difficult decision to use a selective herbicide on parts of the shoreline to control a plant with the harmless sounding name “Common Reed”. Its technical name is phragmite (pronounced
“frag-mighty”) australis , and it too was introduced from Europe. Along the Great Lakes' shores it has spread more in the past few years with lower lake levels and warmer temperatures, and its toxic roots and shed foliage have eliminated many other species and devasted a delicate shoreline ecology.

For many of us, our presence in Canada is the result of a lack of biodiversity in our great-great-grandparents' native Ireland. The potato blight that caused a famine infected both of the varieties of Irish potatoes. With no resistant varieties to plant, the disease destroyed virtually the whole crop for successive seasons. The resulting starvation, disease and migration changed the face of Ireland for well over a century.
We don't seem to have learned from this habit of monoculture. The taste of bananas may soon be a memory for most human beings as the most widely cultivated variety, Cavendish, becomes susceptible to devastating diseases. 90% of the pesticides used to control them is lost to wind drift, ending up in soil and water. The high use of chemical pesticides on our own apples and corn is partly due to our insistence on popular varieties like MacIntosh and Peaches and Cream.

So here are a few things you can do. First, back to our purple loosestrife. If you see it, remove it and put it in a plastic bag in the garbage, or report it. There are a number of cultivars with pleasant sounding names like Rosy Glow, Gypsy Blood and Happy. They are supposed to be sterile, but when pollinated with naturalized species, they have been known to produce seeds that escape the garden – becoming what some local gardeners call “evasive” species. Ask your nursery not to stock these cultivars and plant alternatives like Lupines or Butterfly Bush.

Look for native species and heritage seeds and plants for the garden and try an old variety of apple or pear or corn at the market.

Read local books or join groups like the field naturalists to learn more about the flora and fauna you live with in Grey and Bruce. Take guided hikes and participate in projects to protect habitat and species, like our recent piping plover families.

It isn't the piping plovers or us. Or beautiful gardens versus chaos. It's finding our place in the ecosystem in which we live. The David Suzuki Foundation puts it succinctly - “the interdependence among organisms and their environments creates and sustains the conditions needed for survival by all living creatures.” In the big picture – our very existence is at stake.

Posted by AnneFS

Avoiding the Listeria Hysteria

2008-08-31T16:59:00.000-04:00

Why Cheap Food is Costing Society

Have you, the organically enlightened, ever casually entered a conversation with someone on the subject of organics and been faced with the inevitable question, “Why should I pay double the price for food?” As you can imagine I get asked this a lot and it's a fair question. Some of my favourite answers include, “Because it’s not poisonous”, “You get what you pay for” or my personal favourite, “You call that stuff food?” That said, you might also want to point out the following details:

Foods grown organically don’t cost society as do foods grown with the assistance of chemical pesticides and petro-chemical fertilizers. While ultimately the cost benefit ratio of our foods depends on a whole host of details, including how local we source our foods, how packaged they are and how small are our farmer’s ecological foot prints, in general it is fair to say that society is picking up a huge tab for societies consumption of ‘cheap food’. From water, soil and air contamination, to chemical toxicity in our bodies leading to chronic diseases such as cancer, our health care system, our environment and our food culture are suffering the cheaper our food gets. Don’t see a lot of healthy looking foodies shopping in the grocery isles at Walmart I expect? (And you’re all saying, “How would we know, we don’t buy groceries at Walmart….right?!”)

Not surprisingly, up until now there has been a resistance on the part of industry and I suspect many consumers to find out how toxic we have become because of our love for cheap, mass-produced food and the ‘efficient’, industrial production systems that deliver them. And to be honest, thorough & independent food system toxicology research is lacking and human health studies looking at the links between agriculture and our health are not substantial (although some of you might have read the Rodale Institute article that I referenced earlier in the summer pertaining to the human health impacts of pesticides http://www.rodaleinstitute.org/20080627/n1).

Well, if you’re like me and you would rather know the facts about our food system rather than go on pretending like all is well, here are three paths you could follow to get the straight goods:

1. Go to this site: www.foodmatters.tv and at least watch the trailer. If you want to see the film local Naturopathic Doctor Shelby Worts has it and would be happy to lend it to you. If someone else tells you they can’t afford organic food, they should also see the film.

2. The Canadian Association of Physicians for the Environment (www.cape.ca) is looking out for the public good on the issue of chemical contamination, food and the environment and offers a number of useful links and resources on their website. This is the same body that played a role in helping Collingwood establish a ban on the cosmetic use of pesticides (which has since been over-ridden by the Province) and which recently lobbied hard to have the Federal Government initiate a two year study that will look at human toxicology loads of those aged 6-60. According to their executive director, this falls short of what they had hoped for which was a longer term study also looking at ages 0-6 where it is suspected some of the most serious health hazards exist for environmental toxicology.

3. The Canadian Cancer Society (www.cancer.ca) will be hosting a conference this fall entitled “Exploring the Connection: A State of the Science Conference on Pesticides and Cancer”. I’m interested in going and would be happy to coordinate a group if others are also interested.

In this farmer’s humble opinion raising awareness of the links between chemically grown food, our health and that of the environment will be one of the keys to seeing more people taking the responsibility for keeping themselves, their families and the environment free from harmful chemicals by shifting their diets to locally grown organic fruits and vegetables. So the next time someone tells you that they can’t afford organic food be the one to bring them up to speed on why it is important for us all to stop perpetuating the culture of ‘cheap food’ and let the ‘real food’ revolution begin!

How do we prevent organic food from becoming elitist?

I’m one of the lucky ones. I get to eat organic food all the time, almost exclusively. My children will eat organic, I know that for sure, but I know that there are a lot of families out there that would love to have more organic in their diet but have a hard time finding extra room in the family budget and don’t live on an organic farm. So what to do?

First, what not to do. I had the unfortunate pleasure this week of coming across a news piece online about a family in the States that took pride in being able to cut their food bill in half by being ‘thrifty’ shoppers. From coupons clipping to comparison shopping, this couple appeared not to care about what they were eating, but rather took pride in how little they could eat for. This, my friends, is not the solution as I could see this couples life expectancy dropping as they raced around the supermarket isles ‘beating’ the U.S. recession. However, aside from starting your own garden or becoming a CSA ‘worktrader’ here at NEO, both of which are great ideas and we’d be happy to work with you on, are their other options for getting a real deal on organic food?

First of all, much like the solution to lowering your Hydro bill is not to ask Hydro for a discount, but rather to look at your household consumption and deciding what you can do away with, the key to finding the funds to go organic is to cut out costs that don’t contribute to well-being to the same degree that healthy food could. This might be hard, but it could really pay dividend in term of energy level, mood and overall health.

Beyond that, here’s a couple other ideas (and no doubt more do exist, and I will find them!) that really hit home with me because both appeared to be real win-win solutions to getting more good food into good people’s fridges. Rather than driving (literally) more people towards their local big-box superstore for discounts, they bring people together around meaningful community-based institutions.

1. This first program is one that is taking root in the big city to the south, where some clever Torontonians have started an organization called www.Notfarfromthetree.org. If you go to their website you’ll discover that this is a group that brings together willing fruit pickers with under-utilized fruit trees to ensure that fruit grown in the city’s backyards doesn’t go to waste. What a great idea!

As recently as today, one of our local contacts asked us if we’d be interested in doing something with the bushel of fresh pears that they’d recently picked from a neighbour’s tree that otherwise would have fallen to the ground and gone to waste. Rather than sell them from our stand, where for consistency’s sake we concentrate on selling our own produce and certified organic produce that we acquire from other local farmers, I would love to see this individual share her pears with other locals, who in turn may share with her some cherries, grapes, apples, zucchini or who knows what else. Who knows, soon enough we might have a brigade of urban farmers collaboratively tending to the forgotten fruit trees here in Southern Georgian Bay and distributing the bounty around town (yikes, this might put us out of business – oh well!). You see the best solutions are often driven by necessity and/or opportunity and herein we have people that can’t afford organic fruit and ye! t in Collingwood we likely have tones of trees and gardens that are unsprayed and undoubtedly bearing fruit. Opportunity?!

If anyone is interested in this notion of community driven food security, community gardening or other local food issues, feel free to contact me and I will put you in touch with the two locals that I know that are currently sitting on an abundance of pears! In the meantime, ask around – your neighbour probably has an extra zucchini…

2. The second is an idea that comes out of Vermont where policy makers at the State level came up with the idea of linking food ration coupons for those on social assistance with local farmers’ markets. Each week, people can therefore head to the market and pick up delicious fresh produce rather than drift into the chain supermarkets and look for deals in the processed food isles. Not only does this help the farmers (who sometimes struggle at markets if their regular crowd is on holiday, if the weather fails to cooperate or if the baker that is usually set-up beside them is down at the CNE), but also it puts the most nutritious food in the hands of those who need the nutrition most and who may otherwise not be able to afford locally grown organic food.

Unfortunately in this province ‘farm funding’ continues to lack creativity and vision. Most of the support to farmers goes to commodity groups dominated by agri-business and farmer’s market funding is going towards branding, advertising and bureaucracy – not to the farmers or low-income consumers. Here is a case where without additional funding being required, farmer’s gain regular customers and consumers who find organic food expensive now have a means to access it. That, my friends, is a win-win-win solution!

$1.49/lb cold cuts anyone? Not for me thanks…not now, not ever.

Posted by Farmer Ryan

Afghanistan...A simple Question?

2008-08-21T17:01:00.000-04:00

Another news story. Another ramp ceremony. Another pedestrian-lined highway and a darkened vehicle convoy making its way to a sombre destination. Another city flag at half-mast and another mournful wail from the bagpipes of Charles Meanwell.

Sadly, and to my own shame, I had begun to accept these events as commonplace, as a normal occurrence. At worst I gave it little thought. I have been roused from my melancholy. It is not the return of the dead soldiers that has provoked this arousal. We as a nation have committed our men and women of the Armed Services to a combat mission. The cost of this action is dead soldiers. We have forgotten the cost. It has been over half a century since the Canadian public has had to witness regular payments. What has brought me to this mumble is the question of why? Why are we as a nation involved in a combat mission in Afghanistan?

In reaction I began by asking those around and those who would respond to that simple question. Disturbingly the oft-stated reply was, “I don’t know.”

“I don’t know?” We as a nation currently have our Armed Services involved in the largest combat role in fifty years and in my anecdotal sphere of individuals most began a response with, “I don’t know?” When pushed, humanitarian aid, democracy, the war on terror et al were all touted in automaton fashion as reasons for Canada’s involvement. Some of these provide hollow motivations for our involvement. Democracy and the war on terror I find offensive as justifications. In regards to the former what form of intellectual, political imperialism are we engaged in? Why do we imagine that our system of government is a model that can be utilized in any and all circumstance? Many believe that our’s is the best system, yet how many of us participate? Very few. Our bellies are full, of course our system of government is best. The latter the “war on terrorism” has increased the threat rather than suppress it.

Perhaps the most valid reason put forth was the comment that entailed the elements of Western influence in the Middle East both politically and in terms of material resources, for now and in the future. As the commentator put it, “…it is a circling of the Western wagons…against the East…”

Of interest was the perception of the increased pride that many now feel as members of the Armed Services. Those who in the past would change out of uniform before returning home now don their uniforms with head upraised. The ghosts of Somalia receding. Our media has assisted greatly in this. The recent publication by a well-known Globe and Mail columnist and our own local media representative who returned from the theatre of war, both provide stirring accounts of the efforts of those serving. But much of the information revolves around the individuals. The extraordinary efforts of ordinary individuals in extraordinary circumstances should be applauded and honoured. That honour does not provide an umbrella of justification to the motivations and decisions that placed the individual in that circumstance. The results do not always provide the reason.

There was another tact and tone that pervaded a number of conversations. This revolved around the asking of the question. I must admit that after the first occurrence I “baited” the conversation with the phrase, “I support the troops but not the mission.” Any remaining conviviality evaporated with this phrase. Hypocrite, cowardly, ignorant, unAmerican...I mean unCanadian and a litany of other invectives followed. Why does “Why?” elicit such hostility?

Both soldiers and civilians have a duty. A soldier’s duty is for the most part clear. Do as ordered. For a civilian it may be a bit convoluted. I would argue that it includes the duty to question and to be vigilant to the decisions made by our leaders in their commitment of our Armed Services. It is a duty we owe to our soldiers. How can that decision be clearly made or understood in the context of Afghanistan based on the information we as Canadians have been receiving? How can meaningful discourse be had when to question is received with anger?

We as a nation have allowed ourselves to be pulled into a quagmire. I fear our political and nationalistic motivations for our involvement in Afghanistan will be a stain upon the individual efforts and costs incurred by those our government has tasked to fulfill its policies. The “West’s” interferences and meddling in Afghanistan for their own self interests bear a substantial responsibility for the difficulties now faced by this county and region. Resolutions to these difficulties will be elusive. Any resolution will be tragic and costly to all involved, but in particular to the people of Afghanistan.

Why, still remains the question. The answers I fear will bring no solace.

Posted by Tommyboy

Kicking Down the Door

2008-08-19T00:11:00.000-04:00

I recently spent August 8-11th in Guelph Ontario working on Mike Nagy’s bi-election campaign. The Guelph campaign is one of three federal bi-elections currently underway in Canada.

"What", you may ask, "is the deputy leader of the provincial Green Party doing in Guelph working on a federal campaign"? Well, besides having the opportunity to spend time with great friends in one of Ontario’s more interesting cities, simply put, I’m helping kick down the door.

You see, this bi-election is not just any bi-election. In fact it’s difficult to overestimate the importance of a win by Mike Nagy and it’s significance for Canada and Ontario. A win in Guelph will significantly change the political landscape and the course of history in Canada.

Now, in case at this point you think that I’ve lost my mind and become sucked into some black hole of inwardly focused delusional thinking, consider these 3 facts:

1. A win in Guelph would guarantee Federal Green Party leader Elizabeth May, a spot in the televised leaders debates in the next general election.

Aside from finally making the debate tolerable to watch, Ms. May's presence would have a profound effect on the outcome of the federal election. If in doubt, think back to late 1980’s when Deborah Grey won a bi-election seat for the Reform party. Then leader Preston Manning, was invited to the leaders’ debate and presto!...52 seats in parliament.
Now, compare the dynamism and vision of Mr. Manning with that of Elizabeth May…hmmm. If you’ve ever heard Elizabeth May speak publicly, you know what I mean. Pardon the boxing metaphor, but after the other four leaders go three rounds with Ms. May there won’t be any need for a ten count. Whilst the others yammer away at each other in usual fashion, Ms. May will be articulating an ambitious and sensible vision for the future of Canada.

2. A win in Guelph will legitimize the Green Party for the masses of fence sitters, naysayers, disillusioned types, and bandwagoners.

This will unleash a wave of green support and electoral success across the country at both the federal and provincial levels. Let’s face it, most voters (and non-voters) follow the wave rather than lead it. This is not a bad thing in itself. Agitated political junkies like me are not the norm in society and most folks just don’t consider Canadian politics the most engaging use of spare time. This is of course the main reason that some traditional parties like the electoral system just the way it is. The momentum required to break into the system is immense. It does however keep the extreme views from infiltrating the system…wait, scratch that. I just remembered who’s in power.

3. A win in Guelph will give Mike Nagy and the Green Party the platform needed to begin a shift in the direction and the quality of the political debate in Canada.

Everything from access to the press & office space, to Mr. Nagy’s much needed voice in parliament, means that Canadians will hear with much more frequency, the inspired and pragmatic ideas and policies of green minded Canadians. Mike Nagy is a capable and dynamic citizen who will bring a fresh viewpoint and some much needed respectability to parliament. This is good for Canada, regardless of your political colours.

So, I’ll be back in Guelph next weekend and likely the one after that, taking a metaphorical battering ram to the doors of the Canadian political system. I invite you to do the same. Time is running short to address the economic, social, and environmental crises that we are facing. If the traditional parties were going to do anything proactive about these challenges, they would have by now.

It’s time to smash the doors of our exclusive political system to splinters. You only get to keep a piece if you show up.

Guergis Responds to GMO Labeling Failure

2008-08-18T17:02:00.000-04:00

Anyone Else hear back from Helena Guergis, MP?!

Unfortunately we did, and the disturbing news was nothing short of cannon fodder around the lunch table today at Chescott Farm. Here are some of our favourite excerpts from the notice outlining why Bill C-517 was voted down:

Helena Guergis, MP: “Although my colleagues and I recognized that labeling genetically modified foods to support consumer choice is an important issue for consumers, we were hesitant to support some of the provisions outlined in the bill.”

Farmer Ryan’s translation: “Corporate interests trump issues important to consumers in the Conservative Party Caucus…(wonder why?!)”

Helena Guergis, MP: “If there were any concerns with genetically modified foods that could be mitigated through labeling, such as significant nutritional or compositional factors, Health Canada could legitimately propose regulations to require mandatory labeling. Genetically engineered foods pass the rigorous safety assessment as required by the Food and Drugs Act.”

Farmer Ryan’s translation: “The fact that the majority of the concerns over GMO’s reside beyond the simple compositional comparison of the GMO versus the conventionally grown product at this point in time (issues such as pesticide use on Round-up Ready GMO monocrops leading to toxic contamination of soil, water, air and thus all living species, malicious corporate control of the food supply, threats to the sustainability of the small family farm, biodiversity, contaminatin of non-GMO seed banks and the farmers right to save their own seed…not to mention the lack of long term independent research on the safety of GMO foods themselves) are not things our scientist can understand nor test in a lab and thus we think we have a good excuse not to consider them to be risky.”

Helena Guergis, MP: “It would not be justifiable to apply different rules to genetically engineered foods than are applied to all other products.”

Farmer Ryan’s Translation: “While we can justify applying different rules to organic foods that have a different culture of production because we stand to get a nice slice of the pie from both farmers and 3rd party certifiers by licensing the Canadian Organic Standard and gaining a marketing monopoly on the word ‘organic’ which has been around longer than anyone’s great grandmother has been gardening, we would never dream of forcing the big businesses behind bio-tech foods to pay any extra for labeling or licensing let alone cut into their market share by informing consumers as to the culture of GMO food production through enforced labeling.”

Helena Guergis, MP: “Health Canada has participated in the development of a voluntary standard for the labeling of biotechnology-derived foods. The private sector could then, based on consumer demand, act accordingly along the suggested terms.”

This part simply makes Farmer Ryan laugh. When has the ‘private sector’ ever acted on voluntary standards that would cost them money and market share? What a joke…it’s like giving a criminal a gun and asking them to voluntarily turn themselves in if they use it in a robbery. Glad that Health Canada is an accomplice to this though – taxpayer money at work!

Helena Guergis, MP: “Mandatory labeling to address non health and safety issues could potentially be viewed as an unjustified barrier to trade and would put Canada at odds with its largest trading partner, the United States.”

This part makes Farmer Ryan sick – apparently our government knows nothing of Monsanto’s health and safety record. Why would they though – no Government in Canada or the U.S. has yet shown a willingness to really look into the cumulative impacts of chemical agriculture for fear of a backlash from the corporate/industrial powers that have become entrenched in the halls of political power.

And God help us if we joined the rest of the world and were at odds with U.S. Once again, short sighted economic concerns take precedent over long term health and well-being in Canada.

(Enough of this, I’m going to my happy place…)

Posted by Farmer Ryan

The Voice of Reason

2008-07-30T00:10:00.000-04:00

I was recently enjoying a picnic with friends and family when I suddenly found myself in the middle of a very interesting conversation. On one side of me was the executive director of a well known provincial environmental organization. On the other side was a former Malancthon town councilor and farmer. The farmer, a long-time family friend, is about as traditional a rural citizen as you can find. Traditions of family, small economically sustainable agriculture, and property rights are top concerns for him. For my environmentalist friend, preserving the commons (water, resources, healthy ecosystems) for the future are of critical importance.

As one might expect, the conversation started out a little rocky. My farmer friend was feeling threatened by increased environmental, and other regulation in a business that is less & less profitable by the year. My environmentalist friend was insisting that such regulation and monitoring is essential to the future health and wellbeing of Ontarians, urban and rural alike.

After listening for a while (the conversation had captured the attention of about a dozen others as well), I decide to wade into the rough waters.
We discussed things like the Alternative Land Use Services program which, if applied to all of Ontario, will pay for ecological services provided by farmers. We discussed ways to restore profitability to agriculture thereby creating food security for Ontario, and making projects such as the Greenbelt less painful for the farmer’s bottom line.

Before long everyone had found many things to agree upon, including the need for a greater understanding of the critical connections between urban and rural Ontarians, the need for greater accountability in government, and the need for a renewal of locally based economics.

Welcome to the Green Party of Ontario. In this age of uncertainty, we are rapidly emerging as the voice of reason in Ontario. Gone are the days when the Green Party was viewed as a one issue party. With any success we will also see the end of the days of partisan left-right politics, as we push forward pragmatic solutions based on solid values of social, economic, and ecological sustainability.

We have much work to do to prepare for the next provincial election in 2011. Your continued membership and support is important as we continue to build consensus among Ontarians and unite people in the goal of a better future for all.

Which brings me to one final observation from my weekend picnic. Both my environmentalist friend and my farmer friend are Green Party voters, one in Dufferin - Caledon, and the other in Hamilton Centre. The fact that these two voters are on the same page politically means we are definitely moving in the right direction. With your continued involvement we can become the voice of reason for all thoughtful Ontarians.

Is "Big Organic" an Oxymoron?

2008-07-25T17:04:00.000-04:00

Last week I began speculating as to how the inevitable ‘scaling up of organics’ would affect the craft here in Ontario (note I did not call it an industry – perhaps a sign of things to come…?!) with the entry of the Norfolk Organic Growers Association into the marketplace headed by 1000 acre conventional grower Nightingale Farms of Delhi, ON.

Perhaps now I will briefly wade into the debate over the Scaling up of Organics, waters which are about as murky as they come. To begin with, don’t even bother taking your socks off here and wading in yourself if you are expecting to come away from the discussion with a clear cut answer – one does not exist and it is very difficult to draw lines in this sand.

Looking at this from a consumers standpoint in the present, clearly reliable, affordable access to an organically produced pepper/tomato/eggplant/etc from an Ontario farm is a good thing – very good in fact because these nightshades in particular are hard to come by domestically and if southern Ontario has the right conditions to grow them by the thousands then so be it. But has anyone been down to the tomato belt these days in the extreme southwest of the province?

Huge conventional greenhouse operations dominate the landscape while seasonal workers toil by the hundreds in the hot dusty fields. Conservation lands, treed fence lines and wetlands are few and far between, perhaps a situation that more organically minded farmers might be able to remedy. But what if the conventional organic grower is only organically minded in terms of inputs and not in their respect for and regeneration of nature?

From a producer point of view, I am encouraged by the Norfolk Organic Growers joining others like the Bay of Quinte Growers Coop, the HOPE Collective and other large organic growers like Pfenning Organic Vegetables – it will mean greater food security for organically minded Ontarians. From experience I know how hard it is to manage the complexities of seeding, weeding, watering and harvesting a four acre market garden and I can appreciate that by narrowing the range and increasing the scale of crops under cultivation (as most of these large growers do) a farm can do better with their bottom line. In this sense I think that the cooperative approach – you grow the carrots, I’ll grow the beets and we’ll piggy back each other on our marketing and administration expenses – shows real promise.

Normatively speaking, however, I wonder if we want ALL of our organic growers going large? Will the increase in scale result in a loss of biodiversity; will the absence of chemical inputs offset the cost of closer agro-ecological links (not to mention farmer-consumer contact) that come with more intimate market gardens? I remember having a conversation with a lady from Germany at the market recently who was describing how her country is going gangbusters for organics, but at the same time the balance between large farms and small market gardens has remained relatively stable. Which is to say that there has proven to be enough room in the ‘growing’ marketplace for both.. Apparently farmer’s markets are still very strong and organically oriented, farmers are still selling their veggies from small roadside stands and farm stores, but grocery stores also now carry much wider selections of ‘mainstream’ organic produce at slightly lower prices. “Where do you shop?” I nosily asked. “At both,” she said. “We like buying direct from our local farmer, but if he doesn’t have something I need I am usually at the supermarket once a week anyway so I can pick it up there.” The greatest benefit, she said, of organics becoming more commonplace is that it has brought prices down and brought even more organic consumers & producers into the fold.

Now to the downside. A reliance on mechanized systems, plastic intensive horticulture and imported labour are hallmarks to me of an unsustainable system, but just as much as packaging, imported foods and long distance food transportation are as well on the consumption side – so what do you do?!

Large scale vegetable farms will also necessarily gravitate to sandier, looser soils due to the need for these soils to be extremely workable and tractor friendly. Not only will this compaction impact the soil health, but sandier soils require greater ongoing fertility amendments as sandy soil does not hold up nutrients as well as heavier silty or clay-loam soils. Thinking ecological footprint wise, most of this fertility will come from livestock operations, either composted horse or cattle manure, fish meal or perhaps pelletized chicken manure. Nice eh? Sandier soils also don’t hold water as well either, thus making irrigation demands even greater. Furthermore, recent taste tests have show that vegetables grown in sand are not as nutrient dense or as tasty as those grown in silt, loam or clay soils – all other variables being equal.

In the absence of a community oriented operational agenda, one wonders what impacts the scaling up of organics will have on rural communities, our food supply and our environment. Does 200 acres of plastic covered monoculture even count as organic, given that it is still clearly an assault on nature? Do we want to continue to funnel our food through the large scale grocery store chains, even if lower prices come with higher packaging, more food miles and more consumer dollars exiting the local economy? If the scaling up of conventional agriculture is any indication, corporate organics may run contrary to the foundations of the organic movement, which in this farmers eyes stem from our connections with nature and require thinking holistically and inclusively about our relationship with ecological, economic and social systems. What it is likely to do, however, is bring organics further into the mainstream for all consumers to enjoy – if you like your peppers in plastic packaging that is.

Perhaps the most important lesson to be found in what Norfolk Organic Growers are doing is that here we have an agricultural region that had formerly been dependent on growing tobacco and ginseng, both at great expense to the environment, but rather than go down with the ship this group of farmers have shown vision and courage by banding together and moving into the growing organic niche. Perhaps as our own region assesses its agricultural future, we might want to consider what cooperation in the field of organics could do for the future of our farmers and our environment if we strive to maintain a sustainable balance of small and large farms, artisan market gardens and diversified mixed family farms.

Thinking outside the box –

Posted by Farmer Ryan

Moving Forward in an Age of Uncertainty

2008-07-23T00:08:00.000-04:00

We’ve all heard the saying, “When the going gets tough, the tough get going”. Unfortunately this piece of machismo advice is not often true. History demonstrates that in most cases when the going gets tough, without exceptional leadership, society becomes paralyzed.

We are now facing not just one challenge, but the triple whammy of climate change, energy cost, and the approaching bankruptcy of our growth based economic system. In the face of this, the traditional big three political parties have little to offer other than the status quo. Indeed, they know no other way of approaching politics or economics. In fact, since the 1950’s, our traditional parties have been promoting the very economic system that is now proving fatal to our planet, our health, and our societal wellbeing. Under the circumstance, we can expect little else than band-aid solutions to patch up the ailing patient, based on the inflexible and failing ideologies of left-right politics.

There is however a fourth option; one that brings economics to the service of people and planet, not vice-versa. The Green Party, of which you can be valuable part, uses a different value system upon which to base political decision making. In fact we are the only political party to base our policies on any value system at all!

Our values will keep us on track and position us as the only viable option in this era of uncertainty. We can lead Ontario through the critical challenges we now face and onward to a sustainable future; socially, economically, and ecologically.

At times I find it unsettling that we as a society must endure significant pain before we will acknowledge the need for a change in direction and act on that need. I believe we, as a society, are very near that tipping point. It is for this reason that we must seize the opportunity to show Ontarians a better way. To this end, the council and functionaries of the Green Party of Ontario are moving forward aggressively in preparation for our most successful election campaign ever in 2011. This will mean new approaches to everything from membership building to policy development.

In an uncertain age, we need your involvement and support more than ever to help guide the Green Party of Ontario to success in building a better future in Ontario.

So here’s to opportunity and a brighter tomorrow based on respect for people and planet.

Prophets

2008-07-18T17:08:00.000-04:00

“A prophet is not without honour except in his own country.” A rather awkward grammatical construction, but a true statement nonetheless. We've had some true prophets in our community, and their wisdom has been met too often with eye rolling and mutters of “here he goes again”.

A prophet is not so much a person who foretells the future as someone who holds up a mirror to the present situation and lets us draw our own conclusions. When we don't like the reflection, we tend to dismiss the prophet.

Lately we've been receiving reports from consultants hired to tell us about the economic possibilities and best investments for the future of our region. Whenever rail is mentioned, there are nodding heads as if this were just the brilliant innovation the nodders had had themselves recently, and they relay nostalgic memories of the simple, train-based communities of yesteryear.

Where were these nodders when the decisions were made, in the oh so recent past , to rip up the rails and pave over the right of ways?

When work was being done on Highway 26 between Owen Sound and Meaford a few years ago, John Harrison was making the case for accommodating and retaining the railway overpass for future use. In the end that relatively small cost was saved, for the moment, by simply removing it. Grey County demonstrated healthy foresight when it held on to ownership of the rail lands, but the province made a very short-sighted decision to save a few bucks in the road reconstruction budget. When (and I believe it will be when, not if) rail is returned to Owen Sound, that road will need to be rebuilt and an overpass added at a cost of millions of dollars.

Another example of not wanting to look at the evidence in front of us.

We have conferences and studies and piles of reports from the World Health Organization down to our local health unit on the social determinants of health. They all clearly indicate that we are making community decisions that are resulting in huge costs to our health care system.

Again, the province theoretically pays for health care, but decisions about child care, housing, health clinics and public recreation spaces are made at the county or municipal level. They are often made on the basis of how much money can be wheedled out of higher levels of government, and the scale of the vision is reduced to fit the grant.

We have a current pilot project in Grey-Bruce called PLAY. It's funded by the provincial government to encourage free neighbourhood play to reduce obesity and increase fitness. At the same time, we are nickle-and-diming recreation spaces for teenagers to death. (Exception – Port Elgin's skate park – what do they know or have that Owen Sound does not?)

Appropriate affordable housing – something we are still tearing down much faster than we are building – is another determinant of health. The level of nutrition, security and stimulation in early childhood are important predictors of health in adulthood, yet we still have no level of government putting consistent resources into pre-school children and their families.

And of course, all of the things necessary for the health of our residents depends on having the financial resources to pay in a community that is increasingly pay-for-what-you-get. For those on social assistance, the cuts of the former Conservative government have never been replaced. Although our own member of provincial parliament says concern for poverty reduction in Ontario is “a McGuinty thing”, there's no evidence so far in his second mandate that the premier is prepared make the first and most necessary move – raise the rates.

And are people with jobs secure in their ability to pay for what they will need in the future? Those laid off at Tenneco are just the first and most predictable casualties of an economy built on cheap oil.

We're entering a new era say the prophets. Climate change, peak oil, poor health and politics. It won't be business as usual for long.

I laugh when I hear “who could have predicted....?” I know who, and believe me, they take no pleasure in saying “I told you so”. Perhaps it's not in our nature to apologize for or even admit to past sighs and eye-rolling. But for me, I'm taking these prophets in our community out for coffee. I want to hear what they're thinking about now.

I think there is plenty of hope for new ways of doing things. And I know just who might have an idea where they lie.

Posted by AnneFS

Food Politics

2008-07-07T17:11:00.000-04:00

I assume it is safe to say you’re sitting down and likely familiar with what ‘Farmer Ryan’s Rants’ are all about. Well, this one should be true to character, but as it has been brewing for well over a week now you’ll have to excuse me if it has more buzz than usual. That said, this diatribe is not intended to be an attack on any one in particular, especially not your average conventional farmer – the good natured folk that have been growing our food for generations and who are largely well-meaning. Problem is that this group, like all too many us, have not thought critically enough about the pesticide paradigm that our food system and environmental health has fallen pray too. Furthermore, the conventional farmers that I have had contact with continue to laugh in when I inquire about ‘change’ – citing the fact that they are either too old to change or just plain disinterested in looking at the issue through a new lens.
I personally am not aware of any significant public debate that has taken place now that it appears we are moving full-speed ahead into the GMO era and those that read the frighteningly pro-GMO article in this weekend’s Globe & Mail business section may have come away from it as I did – steaming mad that agribusiness seems content to manipulate nature for monetary gains and disregard negative environmental externalities. In fact, I was so steamed about this over the weekend that Laura has suggested I should no longer be alowed to read the paper. Oh well…

First of all, let's evaluate some of the most frightening statements from this scary bit of business journalism, whose GMO optimism flies in the face of other news stories from the same paper (See Globe Focus, June 14, 2008, pg. F8 – An Amphibious Assault) among other evidence:
"If we're going to have another agricultural revolution, it will need herbicides, pesticides and improved seeds," says Peter Hazell, an agricultural development economist and a former economist with both the World Bank and the International Food Policy Research Institute.

Gotta love this narrow mindset, eh? Of course, we’ve come to expect this from the Bretton Woods Institutions and the like. The first agricultural revolution was, of course, that which began in the 1940’s when wartime chemical/industrial companies spun off agricultural divisions and began apply the ‘increased yields is all that matters’ logic. In return we now have a culture of cheap food in North America along with a host of other social, health and environmental problems.

Now, correct me if I’m wrong, but I thought a revolution was something that was lead by the people for the people, not something that was imposed upon us by multi-billion dollar corporations and their government lackies – I believe the word for that is globalization. Of course, without more people involved in growing their own food and reconnecting with the land, the pesticide laden GMO foods are likely to continue to infest our food system and wreak havoc on our environment.

The rise of GMO farming is already quite staggering:
“Last year, 91 per cent of U.S. soybeans and 73 per cent of corn was GM, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture. The International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-Biotech Applications, a non-profit group that promotes the use of biotech seeds in developing countries, says 12 million farmers in 23 countries grew 114 million hectares of GM crops in 2007 - the equivalent of 220 Delawares. Canada had seven million GM hectares, mostly canola, corn and soybeans.”

The worst, however, is probably yet to come. Dolly the Sheep and growth hormone supported dairy aside, the Monsanto’s of the world are developing a full range of GMO vegetables as well and they’ve already found their way onto the market in the US (sugar beets, papaya, tomatoes, etc.). Lobbying is intense to get Canada on board as well, with both U.S. farm groups and government lobbyist pressing for Canada to adopt them and make the pro-U.S. stance on GMO appear more legitimate. ‘Developing’ countries are of course being given even less say in the mater with food-short and debt laden governments throughout Asia, Latin America and Africa grasping at anything to distance themselves from starvation.

And although it sometimes feels like it, apparently I am not the only one concerned about GMOs as even the Globe was unable to entirely mask the other side of the story:

"Like many others, I do not think the potential long-term effects of GM crops has been adequately tested," Rosemary Stanton, an Australian nutritionist, wrote in the May issue of Australian Doctor. "The GM genie is not something that can be put back in the bottle if future research uncovers problems."

“Bill Freese, a science policy analyst for the Center for Food Safety in Washington, is concerned about the alacrity in which GM foods have been approved, in spite of the lack of long-term research on the foods' potential risks, or lack thereof, on human and animal health, plant life and the environment.”

Even Prince Charles, long standing organic advocate, was able to get his two cents in as the article quotes him ten years ago of accusing genetic engineers of taking us into "realms that belong to God and God alone."

In fact, the more I learn about Charlie, the more I like him. As many of you may know his ‘Dutchy’ brand of organic foods is not-for profit and is supporting the growth in both the supply and demand for organic foods in a number of countries. Furthermore, the Prince has been and outspoken advocate for small-scale organic farming, knowing full well as I do that aside from wild-harvesting, there is no other way to produce food in a truly sustainable, social just and environmentally beneficial manner.

I could obviously go on and on berating the agribusiness industry and the fact that our own government is not doing enough to protect us, let alone study the long-term cumulative impacts of large scale, genetically modified, chemical dependent agriculture. The fact is it doesn’t surprise me because our nation, whether we want to admit it or not, is a culture based on taking profits from extracting the vast resource of our naturally abundant land mass in a manner that our First Nations have always considered blasphemous. Hey, people gotta make a living, right?

Up until now I might have had some sympathy, to a degree. But now that Laura and I are on the cusp of bringing another generation into the world (decode this and you’ll discover our family’s big news!), I am even more adamant than ever that more people need to become more fully aware of the dangers of conventional agriculture around the world, starting right here in our own community. And the mountain of evidence that suggests we are already in the midst of serious health and environmental catastrophes continues to build.

New research reported last week by the Rodale Institute could come as a shock to many and may scare more than a few, considering that we live in an intense agriculture region where chemical sprays are routinely released and are finding their way into our water, air and food supply. The full report can be found at www.rodaleinstitute.org, but in summary, lead author Dr. Warren Porter professor of zoology and environmental toxicology at the University of Madison, Wisconsin, in this cross-disciplinary 10 year study looked at the effects common pesticides (used in conventional orchards, cash cropping and vegetable production) have on the health and well-being of our communities. According to Porter, “normal” exposures in food, water and air at levels considered “safe” by current regulatory bodies the U.S. may be creating many of the serious long-term health problems emerging in humans and wildlife.

“National and international research projects show that pesticides contribute to an increase in aggressive behaviour, birth defects, developmental roadblocks, failing immune function and sexual disorders. And evidence is just surfacing that our fundamental genetic constitution could be in jeopardy.”

While I could go on to report more of the chilling details, needless to say they scared the crap out of me (dad to be) because reportedly the most vulnerable cohort to even (and especially low-levels of exposure – again, read the full article to undertand the science) are children. Ecologically, amphibians, which form a vital link in the web of life, are equally in jeopardy because of their thin, moist skin that has the ability to quickly absorb environmental toxins (again check out the June 14th article in the Globe Focus section that suggests if amphibian numbers continue to decline, insect populations will explode and mammal populations will plummet – sounds great eh?!).

Let’s also consider for a second the costs to our health and education systems for a second if rates of disease and developmental disorders continue to rise (not to mention the aforementioned amphibian issue) For starters, big $$$. Anyone else heard rumours of higher than average cancer levels in our area? My wife certainly thinks she saw more developmental disorders during here year at Meaford Community School than she has in any school previously. So right away we are looking at increased health and education costs, not to mention costs associated with trying to reverse the problem if that were even possible.

So call me an alarmist if you must, but these are the realities that sooner or later we’ll all need to come to terms with and I suggest we do so before it’s too late. When you think about it, the costs of doing nothing will be far greater than taking action now from health, environment and educational perspectives...heck, even from a property value, tourism and economy point of view we could take a big hit if our region is found to be unsafe for us to live in (we’ve got to get property owners attention somehow!).

Fortunately, change is happening, but is it happening fast enough in our area? Europe is of course well ahead of the game with a Union wide ban on GMOs, entire bioregions declaring themselves organic only and rates of organic acreage pushing 30-40% in some countries. Here at home consumer consciousness is certainly on the rise with consumption of organic goods increasing in most centres and farmer’s markets exploding across the country. Yet still, organic farms still make up far less than 5% of the total and the current biofuels boom is pushing more and more land into GMO corn, soy and canola. High grain prices and not encouraging farmers to bring more diversity onto their farms and in fact more marginal lands that should be left to naturalize and reforest are being brought under the plough. We are clearly not heading in the right direction.

So what can you do, how can we make a difference?

Personally I have little faith that environmental health will ever reach the top of the political agenda (that is, unless the Green Party is in power...) with more people concerned about how much their gas is going to cost them to get to the cottage or how many manufacturing jobs have been lost. That said, I have always been a believer that meaningful change can happen on the ground at the local level, which is why I got into farming in the first place. However, one farmer will not win a war and if we care about the health of our community, our children and the ecological systems that support our life than action needs to be taken.

My suggestion, do as I have done and contact your local councilor and suggest to them that this will be a local election issue in the near future. Encourage them to bring the issue to the attention of council and perhaps even a cross-disciplinary committee could be struck to study the issue. We then need funding to complete baseline environmental toxicology studies and money to support farmers progressive enough to begin making the transition to organic methods. A marketing strategy may follow to bill our region as being at the forefront of the organic revolution and pretty soon we might actually be able to back up our claim that the Georgian Triangle is a safe place to live, work and play.

We have so much to gain if we work together to get this right; everything to lose if we continue to get it wrong. Let’s make it happen!

Pursuing a pesticide free future -

Farmer Ryan

GPO Summer Summit - August 21-23, 2009

2008-07-03T22:51:00.001-04:00

Seventh Annual GPO Summer Summit

Cost: $25 - includes two nights camping on site, two suppers, campfire, forest trails.

Host: Peter and Patti Ellis' Farm, 705‑458‑4852, Site #4615,
One km west of highway 27 (Newton-Robinson) on Road #10, just north of Bond Head.

All welcome.

The Summer Summit is where Green Party members (GPO and GPC) and interested folks come to talk green policy, economics, strategy, campaigning, political theory in a relaxed atmosphere. The Summit is a structured but casual forum for idea sharing, green theorizing, and brainstorming. It is a low cost, non-decision making event.

Senate Report on Rural Canada

2008-06-18T15:00:00.002-04:00

The report entitled BEYOND FREEFALL: HALTING RURAL POVERTY runs to over 400 pages but is well worth reading. A report of that size is hard to summarize so I have shamelessly picked some extracts that were of interest to me in order to give you an idea of the scope and tone of this report. The text presented, which has been extensively edited for length, is a little long for this forum, but I hope will create some discussion.
The full report is available in PDF format here
The committee’s recommendations are premised on five guiding principles that should shape any future iterations of rural policy, namely that
1. Policy Needs to Respect Rural Diversity: Policy needs to recognize that “rural is not an absolute but a continuum. Canada’s policy needs to reflect that”
2. Policy Needs to Help Those Who Help Themselves: {Government}must focus assistance on communities that demonstrate a willingness to help themselves through {support} which have a realistic chance of achieving their goals.
3. Policy Needs to be Place-Based: The committee believes that policy needs to be place-based, a notion that embodies the idea that one size does not fit all……….
4. Policy Needs to Recognize that Rural Canada Doesn’t Necessarily Want to be
Urbanized: We have to guard against the kind of thinking and policies that are Premised …….on the belief that rural Canada’s problems are best addressed through policies that accelerate the merger of rural communities into urban ones………
5. Rural Policy Needs to Stop Looking for Magic Bullet Solutions: If rural
Canada is to break free from the vicious cycle of decline that has characterized so much of its recent history, policymakers must give up on the search for “magic bullet” solutions.

The Need for a Rural Champion
To drive this renewed focus on rural issues, the committee believes that the federal government should create a Department of Rural Affairs whose minister would sit at the cabinet table and thereby ensure that rural issues and concerns are always heard at the highest level of decision making.

Rural Transportation
For most rural Canadians, “getting around” means having access or owning at least one vehicle and sometimes two or three – an expensive proposition at the best of times but even more so in rural Canada because travel costs (for fuel and repairs) tend to be higher than in urban parts of the country. For the most part, public transportation is not an option and that represents a serious problem for seniors, disabled and low-income rural citizens………….

THE HEALTH COMMUNITY APPROACH
It is important to recognize that the major determinants of health span a much broader range of issues than mere access to the health care system. The “healthy communities” movement, {snip} argues that health is in fact largely determined by equitable access to such basic prerequisites for health as peace, food, shelter, clean air and water, adequate resources, education, income, {etc.} …………….. Most of this discussion emphasized however what the federal government can do for rural citizens rather than what rural citizens can do for themselves. {Section 4 emphasize’s what rural citizens and rural communities, with a bit of assistance from higher levels of government, can do for themselves.

A Healthy Small Business Sector
Rural businesses are mostly small in size yet are invaluable to the social and economic well being of rural communities. A local convenience store or gas station can mean the difference between easy access to basic supplies and having to travel long distances to buy a loaf of bread or fill up the gas tank.

Some of the recommendations are ……….

RECOMMENDATION 2-3: The committee recommends that the federal government work with provincial, territorial and municipal governments to identify ways in which a range of existing and new services might be delivered through existing rural infrastructure points such as rural post offices.
RECOMMENDATION 2-4: The committee recommends that the federal government move at least 10% of its existing large urban centre employees to
regional centres in rural Canada.
RECOMMENDATION 3-1: The committee recommends that the federal government reintroduce the Canadian Farm Families Options Program with modifications that take into account feedback from farmers……………
RECOMMENDATION 3-2: The committee recommends that the federal
government eliminate the tax on capital gains on the disposition of qualifying farm property of an active farming business to a child (as defined in the Income Tax Act) who commits to engage in an active farming business…………..
RECOMMENDATION 3-3: The committee recommends that, as part of the proposed long-term farm policy framework, the federal government introduce direct payments in recognition of the ecological goods and services provided by farmers and rural landowners.
RECOMMENDATION 3-4: The committee recommends that the federal government should…………. help organize and fund efforts to develop watershed agreements between urban communities and major stakeholders in relevant rural communities. These agreements should ensure that rural communities, including rural private property owners, are adequately compensated for their efforts to protect watersheds.
RECOMMENDATION 3-5: The committee recommends that the federal government provide stable funding to Environment Canada’s Habitat Stewardship Program for Species at Risk over a five-year period.
RECOMMENDATION 3-7: The committee recommends that Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada along with key producers conduct a thorough assessment of the impacts on the rural economy of the various government supports to the biofuels industry……………..
RECOMMENDATION 3-8: The committee recommends that the federal government, with the provinces and territories, change food inspection regulations to ease the entry of local producers and organic growers into the market………..
RECOMMENDATION 4-2: The committee recommends that the federal government provide incentives for sustainable forestry management practices on private woodlots through the Income Tax Act.
RECOMMENDATION 6-4: The committee recommends that the federal government commit to 50-50 capital funding for new rural transportation infrastructure. {and} study how to coordinate existing rural transportation services into a flexible network {that would}provide extra transportation services to rural citizens.
RECOMMENDATION 7-5: The committee recommends that the Canada Revenue Agency and Services Canada undertake to inform clients about the full range of programmes and tax benefits to which they may be eligible, regardless of which program(s) they applied for. {and shouls} automatically calculate an individual’s eligibility for existing and future tax benefits……..
RECOMMENDATION 7-6: The committee recommends that the federal government extend eligibility for its charitable income tax credit to bulk donations of food items………
RECOMMENDATION 8-3: The committee recommends that the proposed Department of Rural Affairs study any existing and potential rural-urban school partnerships, shared schooling services among rural communities, and options for using rural schools to their full potential.

Finally, it’s also about the fact that for some time now, policymakers have focused almost obsessively on urban issues, with one pundit opining recently that rural Canada “has become a so irrelevant demographically that it increasingly exists only in myth,” a view that does little justice to those who live in rural Canada. The consequences of rural neglect are manifest:

• Rural Canada’s population has stagnated – who could possibly want to live in an “irrelevant” part of the country after all? Surely not the doctors, nurses, physiotherapists, labourers, and immigrants that rural Canada so desperately needs; surely not the sons and daughters of farmers, forestworkers, fishers, factory-workers and the like who feed and help shelter, power, and build the nation.
• Rural Canada is ignored in policy decisions – the federal government’s Rural Secretariat is tucked away in Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada and has to continually fight for funding; the federal government’s national homelessness strategy almost entirely bypasses rural housing issues {etc}
• Federal rural infrastructure funds often end up in larger urban centres – even programs ostensibly aimed at small towns such as the municipal rural infrastructure fund (MRIF), often end up funding projects in urban centres.
• Small farmers bear the full brunt of well-intentioned environmental policies and regulations that threaten to put them out of business – we heard time and again that these farmers pride themselves on the stewardship of their lands.
• Forestry workers bear the brunt of a high Canadian dollar and years of policy neglect around Canada’s forestry sector.
• Hundreds of fishing communities have seen their critical infrastructure – their wharves, their roads, their institutions, erode due to a lack of investment.

Farmer's Market in Lion's Head

2008-06-14T09:10:00.003-04:00

Thank you for your interest and support for the operation of a farmers' market in Lion's Head this summer.

It will run most Saturdays from 8 a.m. until noon, beside Golden Dawn Senior Citizens' Home on Main Street in Lion's Head. Although it is not an ideal situation for advertising and establishing a client base, it will run one week at a time based on the availability of vendors and their products. If there are 6 to 8 vendors able to come, it will run. There will be signs put out a few days before if it is going to operate that week.

The opening day for the market will be Saturday, June 21 from 8 a.m. until noon. Although arrangements are still being made, hopefully there will be entertainment, barbeque and maybe a car wash close by in support of school activities. So it will be an exciting day for sure!

This summer's market is inspired by a school project on globalization and our need to find sustainability by supporting our local economy. So, it is a trial run to find out how local vendors can be promoted and supported. I am open to any suggestions, so please feel free to contact me.

Vendors:
Because it is operating week by week, vendors are not asked to commit for the entire summer. Come as often as you can, and if possible, let me know a week or so in advance whether or not you can come. It would be great to have as many producers as possible for the opening day (especially because I am being assessed for my project at this time). Even if vendors do not have produce coming up yet, I would love for you to come. This would provide an opportunity for us to meet, see what the market is like and most importantly, to promote your business (perhaps through cards or brochures if you don't have produce yet). You are responsible for bringing your own table, chair, sign, change and anything else you require, but if this isn't possible, let me know and we can easily borrow from Golden Dawn. There are no vendor fees this year. Please let me know if you can make it on June 21 as soon as possible.

Once again, thank you for your support. Let me know if you have any questions or suggestions. I look forward to hearing from you or seeing you at the market!

Sincerely,
Megan Myles

2 Events to Note

2008-06-13T09:46:00.003-04:00

Saturday, June 21, 2008

12 - 1:30 pm Potluck Lunch followed by
1:30 - 2:30 pm Guest Speaker Freeman Boyd speaking on - PROMOTING THE PRODUCTION & PURCHASING OF LOCAL FOOD at the The Woodford Community Centre, Woodford, ON. This talk will be followed by the AGM for Rural Learning Association

Thursday, July 3 - 6:30 pm

Council of Canadians & Owen Sound Free Press host a talk on the Security and Prosperity Partnership(SPP) by MP Peter Julian.
Owen Sound Harry Lumley Bay Shore Arena - free admission

Participation Necessary in Proposal for Nuclear Waste Dump

2008-06-09T21:22:00.003-04:00

This just in from Ziggy Kleinau.

The fight is heating up, thanks to our neighbours south of the border!

PLEASE SEND YOUR COMMENTS BEFORE THE JUNE 18 DEADLINE !!

*Great Lakes United Green Energy & Nuclear Free Task Force*

Public Participation Necessary in Proposal for Nuclear Waste Dump

Unprecedented underground site would store radioactive waste materials from all of Ontario’s nuclear reactors

May 23, 2008 (Toronto, ON) – Ontario Power Generation is planning to site an underground radioactive waste dump in Bruce County, Ontario, a mere one kilometre (half a mile) from the shore of Lake Huron. Environmental groups fear the independence of the environmental assessment panel will be compromised by the presence of the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission.

“The Canadian government wants to build a nuclear waste dump on the shores of the world’s largest freshwater ecosystem. There are serious risks involved in doing this and we want to ensure a full and independent assessment of what the consequences will be, free of bias from the nuclear establishment,” said Gordon Edwards of the Canadian Coalition for Nuclear Responsibility.

“An independent panel is one that has no conflict of interest because its members are not involved in promoting, defending, or licensing nuclear facilities,” Edwards continued.

The nuclear regulator has never had a seat on a panel for environmental assessments, and their role in this one could set a dangerous precedent, downplaying the dump’s radiological risks to health and the environment.

Great Lakes United’s Green Energy and Nuclear Free Task Force urges that a completely independent review board be established, without Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission presence. The Task Force also calls on Great Lakes residents on both sides of the border to speak out, given the potential hazards of the proposed dumpsite for the entire Great Lakes watershed.

After pressure from citizen groups and elected officials in both Canada and the United States, the Canadian government has committed to a Full Panel Review, but the presence of the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission threatens to bias decision-making in favour of a pro-nuclear position, despite the risks.

“The Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission, like the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, has all too often rubberstamped risky nuclear experiments. Given the grave radiological risks of this proposed dumpsite on the shore of the Great Lakes, they would have a conflict of interest and undermine an independent environmental assessment,” said Kevin Kamps of Beyond Nuclear in Washington, D.C.

“Citizens from across the Great Lakes region will be living with the consequences of this decision for thousands of years. Their voices, and not only those in favour of nuclear power, must be heard,” said Michael Keagan of the Coalition for a Nuclear Free Great Lakes. “The public deserves an independent and accountable environmental assessment. It is crucial that citizens engage strongly today to ensure their voices are heard during the environmental assessment.”

The proposal involves building a deep repository beneath the Bruce Nuclear plant site near Kincardine, Ontario. The largest nuclear power plant in North America, it is looking to build new reactors which could make it the largest nuclear power plant in the world. The dump site would contain all radioactive wastes, except spent radioactive fuel, from Ontario’s twenty nuclear reactors. Waste to be stored includes transuranic radionuclides, such as plutonium, contaminated filters from irradiated fuel pools; thousands of highly radioactive metallic pipes and other contaminated items.

Last week the Macomb County Water Quality Board and the Macomb County Board of Commissioners in Michigan both passed resolutions opposing any underground radioactive waste dump in the Great Lakes region. Over the past two years, members of Congress have repeatedly spoken out against the proposed dump, including Energy Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee Chairman Bart Stupak of northern Michigan, and Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers of Detroit.

“Macomb County is saying very clearly that the actions of its neighbours have a huge impact on the health of its communities and environment,” said Kay Cumbow of Citizens Against Chemical Contamination. “Siting a nuclear waste dump right next to the drinking water supply of over 30 million Canadians and Americans is a disaster waiting to happen.”

Take Action

The documents under review, and the comment process can be found online at: http://www.ceaa-acee.gc.ca/050/DocHTMLContainer_e.cfm?DocumentID=26204

Great Lakes United Green Energy and Nuclear Free Task Force

The Task Force is made up of concerned citizens and organizations promoting green energy solutions for the Great Lakes and St. Lawrence River. It is part of the Great Lakes United coalition, an international voice dedicated to preserving and restoring the health of the Great Lakes‑St. Lawrence River ecosystem. Great Lakes United is made up of 170 member organizations representing environmentalists, conservationists, hunters and anglers, labor unions, community groups, and citizens of the United States, Canada, and First Nations and Tribes.

For More Information

Gordon Edwards, Canadian Coalition for Nuclear Responsibility 514-839-7214
Kevin Kamps, Beyond Nuclear, 240-462-3216
Michael Keagan, Coalition for a Nuclear Free Great Lakes, 734-770-1441 Kay Cumbow, Citizens for Alternatives to Chemical Contamination 810-346-4513

Thank You

2008-06-09T00:06:00.002-04:00

Thank you to everyone who supported me in my bid for Green Party of Ontario deputy leader this past weekend. I am looking forward to my new role representing the needs and issues not only of Bruce-Grey, but all of Ontario.

The female deputy position was won by Judy Smith Torrie from Northumberland Quinte-West. She brings a wealth of experience in politics to the Green Party and I look forward to working with her and Frank de Jong over the next two years to move the Green Party forward.

I have set out three priorities that I will be working on as deputy. First I will work to improve Green Party communications to our members, the media, and the voters of Ontario. I will work alongside Leigh Greaves, our Fundraising coordinator, and Anne Finlay-Stewart, our Support Centre staff person, to engage our membership in a more meaningful way.

Second, I will be working to create relevance in the mind of the Ontario voter through the development of a mitigation plan for the province. We have already begun to experience some of the consequences of rising fuel costs, climate change, and other economic challenges due to globalization. It is no longer enough to try to simply stop these trends. We must now develop credible policy that will show Ontarians the way through these challenges to a brighter future.

Third, I will be working with other candidates, and young constituency associations to duplicate the success that we have realized here in Bruce-Grey-Owen Sound. I will be speaking next week to the Hamilton Mountain Green Party and giving them useful tips to get momentum rolling there.

In addition to these provincial priorities, I will continue working on the local issues that we face here at home. Energy policy, local food, water quality, and building a sustainable regional economy are just a few of the local issues demanding continued attention.

As always, your help, input, and questions are welcome. I can be reached at the GPO Support Centre on 10th St. in Owen Sound. My direct number is 519-470-2242. I can also be reached by email at shane@shanejolley.com .

My website will be undergoing some changes shortly to reflect the work I’m doing in my position as deputy. You can follow these activities at www.shanejolley.com . Finally, the Saugeen Community Blog www.saugblog.blogspot.com will remain active with discussion from a variety of local contributors on local issues.

Thank you once again, and let’s keep building a greener future.

Shane Jolley
Deputy Leader
Green Party of Ontario

Urban Agriculture Project

2008-06-02T20:11:00.003-04:00

In light of an impending global food crisis, The Green Guild is inviting YOU to participate in the first annual Owen Sound Urban Agriculture Project! We are no longer in a period of time where it is even remotely feasible for people in Ontario to be eating pre-packaged salads from California or green peppers from Israel. Ignoring the sheer volume of fossil fuels necessary to accommodate this lifestyle and the impact that this has on the environment, the rising cost of such unnecessary fuel consumption is making it harder to make ends meet, while oil companies are making record profits. Further still, beyond financial and environmental concerns, it’s just logical to eat and grow food in the closest proximity to where you live.

The intent of the project, in its humble beginnings, is not to feed the demand for the entire city of Owen Sound. It is to promote localism, and to get people thinking seriously about pro-active solutions to problems that are the result of unconscious consumerism.

The project is about strengthening community by promoting active involvement. It is about self-reliance and the acquisition of skills that will most certainly become more important in the days to come. It is about taking responsibility as a citizen, and appreciating fully what vital role agriculture plays in the day-to-day lives of urban dwellers. It is very easy it seems, to become detached from the realities that exist behind the bright packaging in grocery stores, behind light switches, and gas pumps.

To participate in the project all you need to do is grow a garden and contribute some of your yield to, and be in attendance for, a tentative celebration to cap off the harvest season. We are looking at making a collective contribution to the food bank as well.

Participation can take many forms. Interested parties are encouraged to send their contact info and any thoughts or suggestions to kyle_stevenson1986@hotmail.com. You may also sign up in person at Billboard Clothing, across from TJ’s Coffee Shop on 2^nd Ave. East in Owen Sound.

Over the summer we will send updates to participants about events that may be taking place, and forward any photos, tips etc. that participants are encouraged to send. Cheers!

Kyle Stevenson

Fusion Energy in 2008?

2008-05-26T18:09:00.002-04:00

by Rob Strang

Non-renewable energy is just that, non-renewable. People can argue about how long it will last, but there can be no doubt that coal, oil and natural gas will not fuel our society forever. So what have our political leaders planned for our children's future?

It doesn't appear like the federal Conservatives have got past the coal and oil age. When Stephen Harper refers to Canada as an energy superpower, he is talking oil sands, among the worst greenhouse gas emitting energy sources. In Ontario, Dalton McGuinty and the Liberals are betting our future on nuclear power. They are ignoring the issue of perpetual waste storage, massive cost overruns and forgetting that uranium is also a non-renewable resource.

Massive price increases in the last eight years may indicate that uranium is not as plentiful as some believe. At best, it will be a stop gap measure until a more sustainable energy source comes along. I suspect that Dalton and other fans of nuclear energy are probably holding a candle for nuclear fusion as the ultimate energy source. The holy grail of energy technology.

Fusion reactions use more abundant, light atomic nuclei as fuel, rather than uranium. It is my understanding that there isn't any physical substance that can withstand the heat to contain it and therefore the reaction must be suspended in a magnetic field. I'm out of my league here, but I picture a floating ball of energy, lots of backup systems keeping it there and politicians with no authority to make technical decisions on safety.

It is also a challenge to get more energy out of the process than you put in. In Europe, scientists have initiated the ITER (International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor) project. This program's goal is to ultimately produce up to 500 MW for up to 400 seconds. It will take 10 years to build and cost 14 billion dollars.

As it turns out, there is another fusion reactor in play that already has a positive energy balance, an impeccable safety record and no close neighbours to complain. It is suspended in a vacuum and has a fairly reliable energy distribution system. It was created by our Creator and is locally called the sun. The energy is delivered at no charge to our doorsteps or rooftops. With crops, trees and grasses, we have even been given a variety of self replicating organisms that will capture this energy and store it for later use.

Our problem is not a lack of energy. Our problem is that we aren't making use of the clean energy that is God given. We have fusion energy. It's right where it should be. It can't be improved upon. We don't need to return all of the carbon in coal, oil and natural gas into the atmosphere. We just need to improve how we use the sustainable energy that we have and learn to limit our demand.

Rob Strang is a former Orangeville Town Councilor, a professional engineer and a self-employed father of three, committed to promoting sustainable development.

Food - Finally!

2008-05-22T22:42:00.003-04:00

I've been receiving so much good stuff via email lately that I haven't taken the time to write much myself. The following is written by a colleague of mine in the Green Party, Erich Jacoby-Hawkins. While the article does not have a specifically Grey/Bruce focus, it is very relevant here as in all of Ontario. Comments are encouraged.

Sometimes, while life keeps you busy and you don't get around to writing down your thoughts, someone comes along and does it for you.

I'm happy that's recently happened for me. I post below links to two
articles about the food situation which express much of what I wanted
to explain, and even better, provide references and links on numbers.
Please read them before continuing on this post, as I intend to refer
to points they make to support my position.

http://www.monbiot.com/archives/2008/04/15/the-pleasures-of-the-flesh/

http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2008/04/25/8512/

These articles combined make two facts clear to me.

1) The world is NOT suffering from a food shortage (yet), merely a
distribution crisis created by unfair trade practices and unhealthy
(both for humans & the planet) food habits.

We are producing enough food to feed us all twice over if we were to
cut back drastically on meat, reduce waste, and stop using farmland
to grow biofuels. (I personally believe that we could switch to a non-
feed-based meat system, i.e. one based primarily on pasture &
other `natural' foods, which would provide about half the meat we
currently consume without requiring us to grow food for animals). We
are still producing a record world grain harvest, despite some major
hits from climate change. If the Australian drought breaks, watch for
our grain production to continue to break records for some time.

Therefore, the world population has not outstripped its ability to
produce food. In fact, there are areas that are now producing LESS
food than they have in the past, not due to shortage of inputs like
water, soil, or energy, but lack of farmers or broken markets making
farming uneconomical.

Lesson: on the world stage, we don't have to focus on population
limitation (yet) or increased food production, but on fair trade and
measures to increase incomes for the world's poor to insulate them
from price shocks while food prices gently rise to where they should
be.

2) Ontario can feed all her people (and more)

The study Monbiot cites says that the UK could feed its entire
population (~59 million) a vegan diet using 3.3 m hectares farmland,
or a reduced-meat mixed diet using 4.4 m farmland and 6.4 m pasture.
(This represents a little over half their available farmland). To
keep us in the real world, I'll map that mixed diet onto Ontario and
not pretend we're all going to become vegan.

Ontario has 5 times the area of Britain, but 70% of our land is
unsuitable for any kind of agriculture. That still leaves us with
over 6 million hectares of "prime farmland" (class 1-3) and 16 m
hectares of potential pasture (class 4-7), or about double what the
UK offers. Therefore, if we eat the `mixed' diet of the UK study, we
have enough land to feed ~120 million people, or almost 10 times our
current population.

Now, I am not advocating that we multiply our population by ten!
However, it is clear that the carrying capacity of Ontario, given a
reasonable lifestyle (rather than the current rather profligate one)
is far higher than the number of people now living here, or even the
number we expect to be here in 25 years. We are not, nor will we soon
be, overpopulated. If population were to about double before leveling off around the end of the century, we'd still have plenty
of food to export.

So the question becomes, do we make population growth the scapegoat
for our excessive footprint, or do we focus on the lifestyle choices
and socio-economic systems that are eating up our natural resource
base beyond replenishment rate? For me the choice is clear. With a
reasonable (and very achievable) lifestyle, not only can we reduce
our footprint to something sustainable, we can do so while
accommodating a significant population increase.

Therefore, I suggest relying on numbers such as these when discussing
population issues rather than pulling numbers out of the air for
lower target populations, or simply assuming Ontario or Canada
is `full'.

(BTW, eat local!)

Erich Jacoby-Hawkins

Farmer Ryan's Rant

2008-05-21T22:53:00.003-04:00

Here's a good rant from Ryan Hayhurst, operator of Niagara Escarpment Organics at Duncan. Enjoy and please comment. Lots of effort went into this one.

It has been some time since Farmer Ryan has had time to rant, and somehow, someway that time has again come. For those who have not been around since the beginning, this is a disclaimer that what you are about to read, if you choose to read it, will probably touch socio-political nerves that may require you to subsequently visit you philosophical chiropractor (psychologist?!)

Remember, just because your food was grown within a hundred miles or so doesn’t mean we can stick our head in the sand beside our plastic Made in China Walmart-purchased lawn chair. There are many ways to reduce your personal environmental impact other than just supporting the local meat guy. How about not eating meat at all for starters – you can more healthily and efficiently obtain the calories your body needs without killing another being anyway – imagine that?!

Furthermore, we have to be demanding of our producers and ask them face to face to make their farming techniques more environmentally friendly and their food more nutritious with less toxins (note: when you do so and if you happen to be driving a luxury automobile, get out of the car first and make it look like you to have just been working in the garden).

We have to suggest to our large corporations and their provincial/national government groupies that we want smaller producers making better products from local materials with local skills – and then we have to support them when they open for business. Talk is cheap remember, but honest local businesses are priceless.

Why? Because everywhere you look these days (well, maybe not everywhere), every channel you turn too (again, probably not all) the talking heads are talking about environmental degradation that is taking place in this country as we all stand all too idly by and in fact participate in this unsustainability because we are not self-less enough, not compassionate enough to make the changes that we need to affect the changes that we want, bringing hope and justice to those that are in harms way.

My incomplete list of current crisis, not including global warming, and with a Canadian emphasis, includes:

- The Mountain pine beetle devastating forests, eating its way east from BC. But fear not, the Olympics is coming to Vancouver and with it perhaps social and environmental justice for all creatures…?!

- Syncrude & company and their polluted oil sands settling ponds, are killing flocks of birds, fish and everything else in Northern Alberta. They did manage to save two of the 5000 bird flock that recently landed though, which is a start, right?! Oh, has anyone mentioned that we are burning our clean natural gas to produce this dirty oil that almost in it’s entirety gets piped down to the States? Good deal, eh.

- Across the north, Caribou herds are threatened by oil & gas development, pipelines and mineral resource extraction. Obesity follows among other things as the native population turns to fast food and office jobs as opposed to traditional pursuits. High suicide rates are reported to be higher of late among a population that was forced to relive their residential school days in the courts to qualify for compensation payments. Hundreds of yet still unresolved land disputes continue to smolder nation wide.

- Saskatchewan, home of Monsanto and the discouraging fields of genetic engineering, chemical cropping and monocultures. Bring back the native prairie I say and let the buffaloes roam! Alas, the oil companies are moving in – there goes the neighbourhood.

- Manitoba…beautiful lakes, but mad mosquitoes. So bad that they blanket the city in insecticides each spring – how’s that for a solution! Humans are now officially ‘integrated’ into the town’s pest management.

- Onterible & Quebec, the industrial heartland and chief consumers of all things. Leafs on one side, Nordiques on the other (oops, they got sold to Americans…) and a whole bunch of agro-industrial economies in between taking more from the environment than they are returning in kind – except for nitrogen fertilizer and agro-chemicals that is, which farmers along the Great Lakes and St. Lawrence still allow to leach into the hydrological cycle causing algae blooms from Sarnia to Sept Ilses and high cancer rates from Pelee Island to Penatanguishine .

- Big News in the Maritimes is Fredricton’s big flood, which accidentally washed almost as many chemicals out the watershed that day as conventional potato farmers will apply and release in maybe, a season?! Respect going out here though to farmers in general, just not the ones who aren’t willing to put health over profits.

- Newfoundland – not only late coming into confederation, but finally looking at joining the ‘Have’ Club of provinces ‘pulling their weight’ in the Canadian Commonwealth, thanks largely to offshore oil projects which would not in a million years ever harm oceanic ecosystems, no, no, no. St. John’s municipal waste continues to go directly into the harbour meanwhile and the seal hunt, in all it brutality, gets worse press because of how cute the seals are despite the fact that Ontario’s veal industry is likely responsible for more deaths of cute little fellas than the Newfs have clubbed since Confederation.

- Overseas there’s genocide in Darfur, probably in Tibet and likely many other minority areas in CCP controlled China – “I interrupt this regularly scheduled programming to bring you the VXIIX Olympiad from human-rightless Beijing”. And guess who is providing weapons to extremist militias carrying out the killings and displacement back in Darfur?! Meanwhile, much of the rest of Africa continues to starve or die of AIDS because leaders are not courageous enough to lead their people away from the ‘World Bank modernization project’ that has failed to bring them much health or happiness. Of course the poor people of Zimbabwe are suffering an unbelievably cruel and unusual fate. What can you say about the Middle East?! Will greedy men ever stop fighting over its oil wealth?

Where am I going with this?

Why does it matter? Why should anyone care?!

Long story short, if all we’re concerned about is the fact that our inflation adjusted net average income hasn’t changed in the last 25 years – (See Globe & Mail Cover) – and continue to measure wealth in terms of dollars earned then our society will continue to be aiming at the wrong target. That said in not aiming at wealth are we to say aim at poverty – in fact the two cannot exist without the other. Why do you think the average income hasn’t changed in the last 25 years? Because the rich keep getting richer and the poor keep getting poorer, but on average…it all evens out, right?

Think about what you have become fond of over the years, what actually means something to you and you wouldn’t want to give up. To me, the words family, friends and food come to find right away. Is this not how wealth should truly be measured?

So what do you want from friends, family and food? You want for their health and that from your food as well. This community in fact forms the basis for human health and well-being and if we are a little more mindful of the way we do it, we can achieve symbiosis with our surrounding environment by nurturing the life systems that nurture us.

So with Ontario faced with the prospect of becoming a have not Province and all us proud Ontarians walking cap in hand to the West Coast welfare line, what say you we show the rest of the country what it means to be good global citizens in an environmentally advanced (more egalitarian) economy.

So our manufacturing is heading south and overseas. The companies that are leaving are probably not the ones that we as Ontarians are necessarily proud of nor the ones that ever would have been committed to taking our economy to the next evolutionary level.

Quite frankly there are some pretty inspiring examples out there of regions and nations taking advantage of their natural abilities and geographies and turning that combination of skill and materials into high value, high quality export goods. Germany comes to mind immediately because they are far further ahead that we North Americans in most of the fields that we’ll need to be strong and sustainable in the future, including

- Transportation (high speed trains, urban tramways, hybrid-electric & hydrogen cars (not sure if they’ve bought into the bio-fuel b.s., but there is no doubt a handful of folks into the mindful minimization of reused veggie oil in the old VW option…;)

- Energy (leading the way in both solar and wind, production and consumption I think? Moratorium on nuclear as I understand it…

- Agriculture (organic agro-stewardship and Steiner’s biodynamic philosophies are well ingrained in the rural culture as is a renewed emphasis on tree planting, which has helped to re-establish an appropriate balance of green space to managed agro-urban space;

- Compact mixed use urban design, green architecture and natural building are all ahead of their time in Germany, in this case partially a result of a progressive mindset & innovation – perhaps also because of their historically human scale urban-rural landscape that was ‘invented’ long before the car distorted time and space as the internet has exponentially in the age of globalization.

- Water – Not sure if they are much better than the rest of Europe, but with the Alpine Glaciers drying up and Germany’s continental climate, I wouldn’t be surprised if water became an issue for them if it’s not already.

- Social Progression – A tough area to judge because like Ontario they are very progressive on some issues (access to healthcare, education, skills training), but less so on others (acceptance/integration of immigrant communities; income inequality; holiday time!)

My feeling is that compact villages and bio-regional economies that produce quality niche goods for export (say solar panels, electric cars, wine & cheese), while still measuring actual wealth not by the number of cars that they sell or panels that they make but rather by how much free time they get celebrating family, friends and food from hamlet to homestead would be the most successful direction for Ontario to turn now in the post-manufacturing, post cheap oil, wish I could say post nuclear era.

We’re fortunate, because like Germany many part of Ontario were founded and shaped pre first time/space distortion, pre-automobile. Therefore, and for example up in The Town of The Blue Mountains where I live, networks of small towns and hamlets still do exist. We are fortunate to have natural comparative advantages in such things as agriculture, recreation and lifestyle and are currently exporting these goods/services to neighbouring regions. We’re not yet self-sufficient in our consumption, certainly not in anything but meat and apples perhaps, but we could be and we should be and we will be if we all get onside and start producing the quality of goods that we need and enjoy. People need to take their money out of large corporate stock programs and putting them into Made in Ontario companies that employ Ontarians to produce goods for local consumption and, in high value niche sectors, produce surplus to share and trade with our neighbours for that which we are not yet producing. It might not produce as much paper wealth as a good run up in technology stocks, but investing in small to medium sized Ontario enterprises will do a lot of good for our triple bottom line, regardless of whether the economists are calling us a have not.

The dollars and cents will generally take care of themselves and greater health and happiness (i.e. real wealth) will be produced if we can shift towards creating a better balance between economies based on resource extraction and an obsession with wealth creation to a society self-sufficient in our consumption of goods, but more than willing to share the quality of our lives with cultures around the world, beginning with the ones right next door. A re-orientation towards the well-being of our own neighbourhood, towns, cities and bioregions (and away from what is happening in London, Los Angeles or Japan) will also serve to alert us to the plights of our own people and our environment.

Think global, eat, drink, build, & buy from as local as possible; celebrate your region, your friends and your family and get going on getting your town ready for the future. Speaking of which, thanks to Peter Mitchell and the University of Guelph students that came by last week to engage in a dialogue with their local farmer and help us move some of our growing tomato plant collection out to the potting shed and get them potted up.

Farmer Ryan

Cheap Goods vs. Sustainabilty & Safety

2008-05-20T22:11:00.003-04:00

The following is re-posted with permission from Laura Robinson, the coordinator of Friends of Saugeen Shores. The group is most noted for their opposition to the proposed WalMart development in Port Elgin.
Her letter is insightful as to the nature of the struggle for community and sustainable development.

Dear Friends of Friends of Saugeen Shores:

Please find attached the Friends press release of this morning about our request to the Ontario Municipal Board for a reconsideration of the decision adjudicator Susan Schiller gave in file #PLO60416 on Tuesday, April 22, 2008. I am not speaking on behalf of Friends of Saugeen Shores, just as me—cyclist, long-time trail builder, coach, and a writer, researcher, and advocate for many, many years on safety for women and children in sport and physical activity. Thank you very, very much for the support you have given Friends of Saugeen Shores and please contact me if you would like to continue to help us. We will once again hold our authors series this summer and fall.

The press release speaks on behalf of Friends of Saugeen Shores. As you will see when you read it, we are quite concerned about the way in which the chair chose to remember evidence and chose to give certain evidence weight and other evidence no weight at all. She cited the fact that our expert witnesses had only visited the trail once and had done so just prior to their testimony as one reason none of their evidence should have any weight.

In response to safety issues the Concerned Women’s Coalition brought up in the spring of 2006 at the public meeting when the Town decided to change the zoning and the Official Plan, the county planner and the consulting planner assured the Town that there were no safety concerns. Neither had walked or ridden the section of the railtrail we were talking about, and did not set foot on it until days before the hearing in 2007. In fact, the planning consultant, Jean Monteith, admitted that in all the years she had worked as a planner for the Town, including in her role designing the Parks and Trails Master Plan, she had not once been on the railtrail. Their evidence was not discounted.

In a nutshell, we had the top experts in Canada on violence against women, women’s safety and urban planning, and women’s safety in sport and physical activity. None of our expert’s testimonies were given any weight whatsoever by the chair. Somehow the chair forgot that our safety audit expert had Level II CPTED training, and wrote that only Wal-Mart’s safety auditor had Level II. She decided to believe evidence submitted by an expert paid by Wal-Mart who said the railtrail was safe and that the future development would be safe.

In her witness statement, one of our experts recommended that safety audits not just take into consideration the circumstances at the proposed site, but look to other sites where similar developments have been built. She referred to the Brooks, Alberta Wal-Mart where a sixteen-year-old female employee was found murdered on the outskirts of town. A former Wal-Mart employee had been arrested for her murder. Our witness was berated for a long period of time, which the Chair allowed, while Dennis Wood, the lawyer for Wal-Mart continued to question what connection this could possibly have to our site. In her decision the Chair criticized this witness for insisting that there could be a useful relationship between the circumstances in Brooks and this development.

During the time period the Chair wrote her decision, the trial of thirty-year-old Colin Winsor for the second-degree murder of Ashton Moen, the sixteen-year-old Wal-Mart worker, took place. She was last seen by other Wal-Mart employees in the Wal-Mart parking lot two hours before her afternoon shift. She had been driven there by Winsor, who told her he would give her a ride to work. There is no public transit in Brooks. The lack of public transit in Saugeen Shores is one point our experts raised more than once when they analyzed safety at the site. Winsor, who said he had “consensual” sex with Moen before killing her, was found guilty of second degree murder.

I am not speaking on behalf of FOSS, but only as someone who has spent most of her life trying to make it easier for us girls and women to be girls and women. Before the Chair chose to write what she wrote about this witness in the manner that she did, she could have done a little bit of homework on this particular example. Our expert was simply saying it would be helpful to look at other similar sites in similar situations—like small towns where there is no public transit and the Wal-Mart is located in an isolated area. Interestingly, the Chair accepted testimony from Wal-Mart’s safety expert when he looked at similar sites and found them to be safe.

Pretty depressing, especially when you add the average attitude around here, which is to despise those of us who have chosen the course of due process in this matter and appealed to the OMB. The scariest part of it all is the delight that people have taken in hating us, and the anger they honestly feel over the delay in their access to cheap goods. Riding your bike here is dangerous. Just about everyone has a huge pick-up, and uses the residential streets to speed and squeal tires. No matter what their age, all these guys are sixteen. This development will make it clear to everyone that the automobile rules and the body doesn’t matter at all. Active bodies will just get in the way of the real reason for bodies here—non-stop consumption. If we go by the violent pornographic graffiti at the trestle bridge near the proposed site, the bodies of girls and women on the railtrail and the parking lot, when they finally get off their shift, will be at considerable risk. But then, the Wal-Mart planners recommend that a co-worker can walk those girls and women to their cars—or maybe give them a lift like Colin Winsor did in Brooks.

Even more depressing is that all of this happened during an affordable housing crisis here. So why not turn residential land into highway commercial? Until 2001 this land was zoned agricultural. We could have had affordable housing and garden plots. During a time when there is a global food crisis, when fuel prices will only rise, when climate change is a given, when there is no understanding whatsoever of the importance of having a relationship with the land, or any regard for history, this 17-acres that rises beautifully and gently to the east because it is the ancient shoreline of Lake Algonquin, will be flattened and replaced with asphalt and concrete where food that could have been grown on it, will be trucked in from thousands of kilometres away.

I very much hope the Chair of the OMB seriously reconsiders this decision.

Keep well,

Laura Robinson

The Triggers to My Environmental Bi Polar Disorder

2008-05-16T20:56:00.005-04:00

The causes of my malady are numerous, but recent events have heightened my symptoms. The following are three, which have triggered my spiral into another episode of environmental bi polar disorder.

I recently assisted a friend doing tile work in a house one hour’s drive away. The tiles for this three thousand foot “second home” came from a land far, far away. The owners of this beautiful abode live about five hours away, in their other home. The waterfront sunsets will be joyful to witness in the company of the dozen or so other seasonal dwelling dotting the landscape in close proximity. A landscape littered with “seasonal homes”.

I for the first time sat with friends and engaged in the viewing of the spectacle known as Superbowl Sunday. I had always derided these events as some form of modern, Roman bread and circuses. Sit entertained while Rome burns. I sat awestruck at the images of a large urban development in the desert. Within the confines of this development was a tremendous entertainment facility designed to move its entire surface in and out of the structure to provide optimal growing conditions for a football field of grass.

My daughter and I traveled to the spring motorcycle show in Toronto. Passing from the rural countryside north of Shelburne into the urban sprawl to the south gets ever more disconcerting the few times I venture south. Here advertisements for “modestly priced” homes dwarfed in price and square footage any notion I have ever held of the term modest. It is beyond simple inflation. Even more disconcerting was the realization that the direct fuel costs of this adventure came to under twenty dollars (1986 diesel Jetta. With many thanks to Wolf’s, who continue to keep my Jetta going).

We live in an economy whereby “second homes” are not uncommon. They are far from the ambit of only the rich. Differences occur not in ownership, but in grandeur. We live in an economy where a contractor can drive great distances, install a product manufactured and transported even greater distances and still make what many regard “a good wage”.

We live in a world where cities are built in deserts and edifices to entertainment are devised and designed for the oddest of purposes. We become engaged and entertained in these modern day coliseums, allowing ourselves to dismiss the flames and heat at our heels. Give me another loaf of bread. We live in a world where homes of thousands of square feet are built when less would be sufficient. We live in a world where my daughter and I can travel hundreds of kilometers and the fuel costs are eight cents a kilometer. Eight cents. It cost eight cents for fuel to transport two humans and over a thousand kilograms of metal a kilometer. How much was your coffee today?

I purposely avoided the more egregious examples in our world and singled out three of the mundane I have witnessed in the mediocrity of my existence.

We live in a world where we continue a consumerist lifestyle unabated. In an economy that is unsustainable. We mutter and fret about the environment, some of us on high, with great moral indignation at the lack of action. Yet we live as we live, purchasing our modern day medieval indulgences in the guise of recycling, or green rinsed products and services. Yet few of us, me included undertake any true efforts to make dramatic changes. We continue to desire an endless list of cheap consumer goods and then make payment to our church of recycling and green gods in order to purge ourselves of our sins.

Frankly, why should we change? We are living in the ultimate “curse of the common” scenario. We have and will use and abuse the resources of this “common” planet until some event forces us to do otherwise. It may be environmental degradation that leads to this event. But this is only symptomatic of a collective, heightened sense of entitlement and greed.

See, this is where the schizophrenia comes in. I believe we will stumble along towards some form of political, environmental or other global difficulty. It will be disastrous, tragic and devastating. Corrections and changes will be dramatic in sweep and scope. But we as a people and species will plod on. I have to believe this. What’s the alternative?

This is my happy thought. If you know a good therapist who will work for chocolate cream horns, give me a ring.

By TommyBoy

Email

2008-05-15T18:57:00.003-04:00

Breaking the law?

2008-04-25T19:23:00.002-04:00

Recently Owen Sound Radio News has been “advertising” (and make no mistake, it is a government sponsored advertisement) that it is illegal to have an “open” fire other than between late evening and early morning within Ontario. I guess I am now a criminal! I regularly cook outdoors on a WOOD fired BBQ during the day, French Toast on the BBQ for breakfast after a hike in the bush is simply a delight that cannot be forgone! Supper is regularly cooked outdoors on a wood fire and is equally enjoyable with regard to both the result and the process.
I must assume this is an “advertisement” from some ministry of the government trying to reduce the fire hazard in our rural areas (but why Province wide without exception?), I have no problem with an education program to stop folks from lighting a fire in a situations that may create a hazard or high risk of a grass or bush fire. I am in fact VERY aware of the risk I take when cooking outdoors, after all I have 30 acres of bush (much of it rather dry pine) of my own, but to make RESPONSIBLE folks criminals because irresponsible folks know no better seems like overkill to me.
Now , what makes this a Green / Sustainable issue? Well, it is quite acceptable to run a propane BBQ using a non renewable resource and an open flame (and even use it in town and adjacent to you house) without any problem. But if I put wood (a renewable resource) into the same container it then becomes illegal! What is wrong with this picture?

NOTE – For those not “tuned in” burning wood is carbon neutral over the period it took to grow an burn the fuel (generally abt 20 – 50 yrs), the same is true of fossil fuels by the way, it just that the carbon is sequestered over thousands of years, if not millions, is released within a few decades! (Wood also naturally releases its carbon as it rots on the forest floor so we, by burning it, merely accelerate the process by a few years.)

Much has been said on the news about the enclosed “fireplaces” sold for backyard enjoyment as being “illegal” even though sold within the municipalities that do not condone their use. So…they are legal to sell but illegal to use? Truth be known, as things stand right now if you are using a fire of any kind for warmth or cooking the municipality, fire marshal, or even Ontario cannot stop you. So make sure you are responsible, be safe, water nearby, clear of any fire hazard, keep it small and keep a HOT DOG (or your food of choice) nearby. Then enjoy and tell the Politically Correct crowd to “take off”. In my view it is better to burn wood in a controlled manner in a shielded burner (or carefully prepared fire pit) than to burn a manufactured fuel in an open and unenclosed BBQ.

I note that some have said (in support of the municipal bans on wood burning enclosed appliances) that the “wood smoke” is objectionable particularly within a built up area. I wonder what would happen if one complained about the smell coming from BBQ lighter fluid or burnt meat, or for that matter the diesel fumes coming from the truck delivering that new propane BBQ? It all a matter of perspective.

Where's the beef!

2008-04-19T14:21:00.001-04:00

A “tip o the hat” goes out to All Country Feed & Grain Ltd of the Markdale area for their efforts to provide local stores with locally grown beef. The Sun Times recently reported that after some success with supplying local beef for a large contract in Ottawa they now are organizing to provide locally grown and butchered beef to local “householders, food retailers, restaurants & institutions”. It is said that keeping it local will provide the “producers with profits and the consumers with competitively priced beef.”

It sounds like a plus for all concerned, well done guys!

Can Greens make a difference?

2008-04-09T09:07:00.002-04:00

In case you missed it the Green party leader will be in town April 24th giving a speech at the Bayshore at which time it is expected that the date for the Candidate nomination meeting will be announced. Which makes me wonder exactly how much impact the Greens can have on our dysfunctional Federal government. If whomever we elect no matter which party they belong to is merely an arse to warm a seat in the Commons, and the PMO of which ever party happens to be in power run the place like a dictatorship why bother.

I am constantly surprised at how little attention is given to the way in which our parliamentary system is being subverted by the established partys for their own reasons. The following are a couple of clips from one of the rare news articles highlighting the way in which everything has come to a grinding halt under the present Regime.

CP news reported a couple of days ago that…..

“Conservative MPs respond by walking out on meetings, or whiling away the hours by reading aloud from old public documents, or refusing to meet, or repeatedly adjourning proceedings, or running out the clock with marathon monologues that have lasted up to six hours.”

"The procedure and house affairs committee. This body oversees House of Commons business - including other committees - and it no longer meets at all."
The original article is no longer available on the internet and has been replaced with one less critical of the government and now includes Harpers “excuses”!?

A link to part of origional the piece may be found here http://www.vivelecanada.ca/article/235929845-partisan-paralysis-in-parliment

This whole thing tells me that we MUST get some fresh blood into the House and it MUST be folks that are prepared to speak for the people NOT the party, work on consensus and cooperation NOT partisan politics. I view the Greens as our last best hope to turn thing around and rescue our democracy and I hope we can get some in parliament soon but unless there are many of them I am unsure, given the way it is working now, how much good they can do.
How about SUSTAINABILITY IN PARLIAMENT?

Wiarton Farmers Market

2008-03-28T10:13:00.003-04:00

A move is being made to establish a Farmers Market in Wairton, the following is information copied from one of the flyers currently circulating in the area and presented for your information.

I do hope that the cost of the space and the insurance requirements do not discourage to many small operations from participating and wish them well in this Local Sustainability venture.

You ARE INVITED TO APPLY TO BECOME A FOUNDING VENDOR OF THE BRAND NEW WIARTON FARMERS' MARKET.
The Wiarton Farmers'Market will be held Friday afternoons from 3:00 to 8:00, May 30th to October 10th (20 weeks) in the parking lot just South of Town Hall on Berford Street. The initial season of this venture is sponsored by the Town of South Bruce Peninsula and will be run by an association of vendors and stake-holders in subsequent years.

OUR VISION
Our vision is to establish a sustainable market for local producers and the community which will:
* connect consumers with local food providers
* stimulate the local economy
* encourage, support, and celebrate local seasonal production
* provide an environmentally conscious buy-local opportunity for the Wiarton area

In support of this vision, applying vendors must also be the producers oftheir product and reside in or conduct business within the Grey-Bruce area. Applications will be weighed in terms of the quality of their product, how locally the product is made, and the vendor's commitment to the Market and the Market Vision.

A vendor may apply for the entire 20 week season ($175), or by the week ($20/week).
There is no charge to apply, yet accepted applicants will be subject to the above-mentioned vendor fees prior to the first Market day.

APPLICATIONS MUST BE RECEIVED BY FRIDAY, MARCH 28TH
TO ENSURE THAT FINAL DECISIONS CAN BE MADE BY MONDAY, APRIL 14TH.
Please fill out the attached application form and mail it to:

Kelsey Carriere RR#2 Wiarton NOH2TO
For any questions, clarifications, or to have an application sent, please call myself,
Kelsey Carriere (519) 534-2043

Sustainability or Poverty

2008-03-17T09:54:00.001-04:00

In a reply to “Is anybody there?” Francesca said:-
“Sustainability is a key focus for this discussion group. How does sustainability relate to issues such as poverty and related issues?” and requested that the subject be opened for discussion.

This is not a subject I have thought much about but will say a couple of things and then leave it up to others to say more on this subject.

It seems to me that poverty is almost entirely about jobs! Sure the ability or willingness to find a job may be affected by education or social upbringing but if one is to make any progress one must have a JOB, and one that pays enough to live on. If one examines the job bank or local paper job listings on an ongoing basis (as my son and I have done for the last year in trying to find a suitable full time job for him) you will find that the majority of jobs are for “professionals” of one sort or another, and many of the rest call for “experience”. The number of local jobs available to unskilled or even semiskilled applicants is minimal, and if you are a youth , well…………

So in being “sustainable” it seems to me that creating LOCAL jobs for LOCAL people using LOCALY owned firms has to be a priority, and that the availability of such local jobs would have an impact upon those living in “poverty”. You will note that I have put that word in quote because the definition of poverty is unclear to me, having over the years had family earning well below the “official” poverty level we have never considered ourselves impoverished, and never resorted to government assistance. In point of fact careful spending and saving have allowed us to do quite well thank you.

I will say that once one has sunk to a truly impoverished condition where finding accommodation that leaves one with enough cash left to eat, it is VERY difficult to rise out of that hole.

So there it is, I have started the discussion, its now up to the rest of you to have your say!

The Great Dictator

2008-01-22T09:20:00.000-05:00

This is the final speech in Charlie Chaplins little known 1940 film “The Great Dictator”. I recently became aware of it through a posting on the Vive le Canada website and thought it bears repeating in these days of questionable actions by governments large and small across our world. It has nothing to do with local sustainability but much to do with the human condition. It seems little has changed in 60 plus years.

From “The Great Dictator”

“I'm sorry but I don't want to be an emperor. That's not my business. I don't want to rule or conquer anyone. I should like to help everyone if possible; Jew, Gentile, black men, white. We all want to help one another. Human beings are like that. We want to live by each others' happiness, not by each other's misery. We don't want to hate and despise one another. In this world there is room for everyone. And the good earth is rich and can provide for everyone. The way of life can be free and beautiful, but we have lost the way.

Greed has poisoned men's souls; has barricaded the world with hate; has goose-stepped us into misery and bloodshed. We have developed speed, but we have shut ourselves in. Machinery that gives abundance has left us in want. Our knowledge as made us cynical; our cleverness, hard and unkind. We think too much and feel too little. More than machinery we need humanity. More than cleverness, we need kindness and gentleness. Without these qualities, life will be violent and all will be lost. The aeroplane and the radio have brought us closer together. The very nature of these inventions cries out for the goodness in man; cries out for universal brotherhood; for the unity of us all.

Even now my voice is reaching millions throughout the world, millions of despairing men, women, and little children, victims of a system that makes men torture and imprison innocent people. To those who can hear me, I say "Do not despair." The misery that is now upon us is but the passing of greed, the bitterness of men who fear the way of human progress. The hate of men will pass, and dictators die, and the power they took from the people will return to the people. And so long as men die, liberty will never perish.

Soldiers! Don't give yourselves to brutes, men who despise you and enslave you; who regiment your lives, tell you what to do, what to think and what to feel! Who drill you, diet you, treat you like cattle, use you as cannon fodder! Don't give yourselves to these unnatural men---machine men with machine minds and machine hearts! You are not machines! You are not cattle! You are men! You have a love of humanity in your hearts! You don't hate! Only the unloved hate; the unloved and the unnatural.

Soldiers! Don't fight for slavery! Fight for liberty! In the seventeenth chapter of St. Luke, it’s written “the kingdom of God is within man”, not one man nor a group of men, but in all men! In you! You, the people, have the power, the power to create machines, the power to create happiness! You, the people, have the power to make this life free and beautiful, to make this life a wonderful adventure. Then in the name of democracy, let us use that power.

Let us all unite. Let us fight for a new world, a decent world that will give men a chance to work, that will give youth a future and old age a security. By the promise of these things, brutes have risen to power. But they lie! They do not fulfill their promise. They never will! Dictators free themselves but they enslave the people! Now let us fight to fulfill that promise! Let us fight to free the world! To do away with national barriers! To do away with greed, with hate and intolerance! Let us fight for a world of reason, a world where science and progress will lead to all men’s happiness.

Soldiers, in the name of democracy, let us all unite! “

Charlie Chaplin

Video at http://freedomvideo.org/blog/?p=490

Spreading the Word in Grey & Bruce.

2007-12-19T08:40:00.000-05:00

This is a proposal to enhance the communication between Municipal and Regional Councils, Event organizers, Charitable and Social agencies etc. with our local citizens using available internet tools. I hope that the few who continue to visit here will think about it, talk to the organizations mentioned, comment upon it and encourage others to do the same.

The advent of the internet and more particularly Blogs and the systems to easily and quickly post and manage information from a wide variety of sources has made this medium a must for those that wish to keep up with current affairs. Traditional news media (and some blogs) are now linked to internet search engines so that almost any subject may be rapidly researched without leaving your chair.

Unfortunately the things that should be most important and relevant to us are often missing, I refer to items of LOCAL importance that do not necessarily hit the headlines in print or radio and TV. One such item that is often missing are reports from our local or regional councils. Unless there is some controversy or a specific need to notify the citizens much of the work of council goes on unseen and unreported, I believe this should and can change.

Some councils are better at keeping the citizens informed of current matters under consideration that others, and nearly all post approved minutes and by-laws on their web sites. This is however HISTORICAL information and usually only posted as a downloadable file and not viewable online, and one must go to each individual web site to see what is newly posted. I propose a more timely internet content. Producing and managing a forum for this is relativity easy, the difficulty arises in obtaining factual, up-to-date content.

I propose that our various councils and other community boards and committees (across Grey & Bruce counties) be approached to see it they are open to delegating a person within their individual organizations to submit, on a regular basis, details of what is being discussed, upcoming issues and decisions made in order to keep the “public” informed. As I have said above there will be some who want to keep as much as possible out of the public eye but I would hope that others would find such a forum a useful tool. Each organization would have to decide what was suitable for release and who would be authorized to post it and this may well create some difficulties, but most will already have a policy regarding such “news releases”, meeting details, upcoming events or other information of interest to the community.
There may also be room for “citizen” reports from those entities that do not participate themselves, provided that some means of ensuring “objective” reporting can be ensured.

The process must be simple for both the submitting agent and the reader so that neither has to spend a great deal of time to accomplish what they wish to post or read. To that end (and for the benefit of rural and urban users who use dial up connections) I believe that the pages should be simple text with no “heavy” content such as pictures, audio or video. Articles should be short and to the point and contain links to more extensive information as and when necessary, the aim of the pages should be to make the citizens aware of the particular issue not necessarily to discuss it at length. Only the title and first paragraph or so would be shown on the main page in order make it easer to quickly browse the content. It may be desirable to produce, and link to, in depth background articles where the issue needs further explanation.

It is not clear to me at this time exactly who should or should not be able to post in such a forum, but as a rough guide I submit that any not for profit Local organization (which of course includes councils, health committees, community events, and the like) should be allowed to do so. Non member organizations would be able to submit articles for consideration either directly or by email. This would have to be decided on an individual basis either by application or invitation.

I do think, however that it should be possible for citizens to comment upon items and for the submitting organizations be able to review those comments. It may be necessary to require a “membership” to post comments in order to ensure that the responses remain “local” and relevant, that remains to be seen. It should not become just “another blog” and should be narrowly focused upon municipal affairs and community development and have regular new articles clearly indexed by content and date.

The forum will need some upkeep and moderation and this should be accomplished by a “team” rather than an individual, both to reduce the load and to minimize the possibility of “editorial” bias. This could be a group of interested local citizens preferably consisting of those with no particular bias or association with political partys or lobby groups. Another possibility is to solicit simple text business listings on a modest pay for use basis to help pay for web space and upkeep. I suggest that these need to be limited to local independent operations in order to encourage local development and to limit the amount of advertising on the pages.

This then is the general idea and this is a call for those mentioned within this piece and those who may want to view that kind of content to let me know if it is:-
a) a good idea. (or not!)
b) feasible from your organizations point of view.
c) if you have any ideas on how to improve upon the basic concept.

Please pass this around, talk about it, copy it to others that may be interested and let us know what you think. If I get some positive feedback I will go further by providing an email link to collect detailed responses and summarize them in a return email to each responder, and may attempt to form a committee to establish said forum. I would also like to hear from you if you are willing to be part of the “team” or can assist in providing web space or expertise.

PS. I would like to take this opportunity to wish you all Happy Christmas, Seasons Greetings or whatever is your particular preferred greeting is this time of year. May you all have a really great 2008.

12/19/2007

Mixed News!

2007-12-06T11:46:00.000-05:00

I found the juxtaposition of these news stories from Owen Sound Radio News this week interesting……..

Farm stories for December 4thWritten by Jim Birchard
Ontario pork producers are facing some very tough times.
It's all becuse of the high value of the Canadian dollar, high feed prices and low pork prices. Curtis Littlejohn is the Chair of Ontario pork and says the Ontario government step forward with some immediate financial help………………………..

And……….

The federal government is reintroducing legislation that would set minimum biofuels content in gasoline, diesel fuel and heating oil within three to five years. If passed, the Renewable Fuels Bill would require five per cent ethanol in gas by 2010 and two per cent biodiesel in diesel fuel and heating oil by 2012.
Agriculture Minister Gerry Ritz says the legislation will mean new jobs, as well as new markets and better profit margins for farmers. As part of the package, Ottawa previously announced 1.5 billion dollars to help producers get biofuel production up and running.
----------------
Better margins for GRAIN farmers maybe, but it sure wont help the cattle and pork farmers! I wonder how much of the 1.5M will go to the farmer and how much to the BioFuel lobbying industry. I have previously had my rant about this at http://saugblog.blogspot.com/2007/06/as-push-towards-biofuels-gains-momentum.html

Then there is this on more “green” energy………

New wind farm plans in Tiverton Written by Ken Cassavoy
Suncor Energy and Acciona Energy have started preliminary tests on a possible wind farm site southeast of Tiverton.
Hulse says the proposed project is in the so-called "Orange Zone" which means that, at least for now, there are transmission constraints in place and, until additional transmission capacity is built, no new projects will be built in the area.
She says, depending on developments in the new year with the Ontario government, the project could be as large as Ripley - 76 megawatts-38 turbines - or limited to a 10 megawatt project involving five turbines.

And…………….

Hanover could lose a doctorWritten by Diana Meder
A Hanover doctor says he doesn't want to leave the area ...but may have no choice.
Dr. Paul Eisenbarth is not only the head of the emergency department ..he's also a cattle farmer who's upset with a plan to potentially change the route of the massive hydro transmission lines planned for Bruce Power to Milton.
He says he'd likely have to pull up stakes ...not being able to run his organic heritage cattle farm or protect nearby wetlands. (I really do not understand why not?) Eiesenbarth says its ridiculous to move lines that already have an existing corridor to go through farms and wet lands.

And then this, one of many doctors leaving or retiring……….

Kincardine loses doctor to Hanover Written by Jim Birchard
Kincardine's loss is Hanover's gain.
Kincardine will be losing a family physician this spring when Doctor Susan Boron relocates her practice to Hanover.
Rogan says Doctor Boron currently lives in the Hanover area. He says Doctor Boron has practiced in Kincardine for the past 30 years and the decision to relocate to Hanover was made with a great deal of thought and consideration.

…………………………………..

Seems like somedays you just cant win!!

Carbon Monitoring for Action

2007-11-25T13:12:00.000-05:00

For those of you who want to see exactly where Canada, Ontario or even individual power plants stand on the C02 emissions scale per MW output versus the rest of the world, this new Carbon Monitoring site has a lot of information. Each Country and power plant is rated with details of output past, present and future. Lots of information.

Visit http://carma.org/

Anti Idling By law

2007-11-20T08:02:00.000-05:00

Anti Idling By law up for vote tonight
Written by Jim Birchard, Owen Sound Radio News (with minor edits)
Owen Sound Council taking part in its version of Owen Sound Idle tonight.
A proposed anti idling by law up for discussion and a vote and Councillor Deb Haswell hopes it will be passed. She says this is an important piece of legislation as it will impact the health of just about everyone living in Owen Sound. She says excessive idling impacts the environment and air quality, which makes it difficult for people suffering from asthma and other medical conditions.
Haswell says under the proposed by law, private vehicles will not be allowed to idle for more than two minutes and commercial vehicles powered by diesel engines can only idle for up to five minutes. She says there is also an educational component to this by law and she hopes once people understand the intent, they will turn off their engines. However, if they don't, then by law officers will hand out tickets when ever a complaint is made.
Haswell says there will be some exemptions made for medical reasons and for extreme hot or cold conditions. She describes this proposed by law as a lot more relaxed compared to those in other Ontario cities.
……………………………….
The news this morning says that the wording has been approved and it will probably be adopted next week!
Many folks will think this is a step in the right direction ,I am not so sure. Firstly any bylaw that is not enforceable equitably across ALL citizens is suspect. Even before it went to council, it was indicated that this would be enforced “in the same manner as most other bylaws” ie as and when complaints are received. Apart from the potential for personal vendettas to be pursued though this means, how can a by law officer charge an owner with this “crime” unless he or she personally observes the vehicle idling for said period of time! THEN there is the issue of trying to drive cross town WITHOUT violating the bylaw as written, unless there is exception for “normal traffic flow” a trip across town at the wrong time off day could land you in trouble. Perhaps more emphasis should be put upon curing the grid lock downtown if the city really wants to reduce the impact of auto exhaust. And how about the difference between that put out by a little compact and a big out of tune diesel (commercial or not) and yet both treated the same, (actually the “commercial” diesel can run more than twice as long before being subject to the bylaw) the whole thing is total nonsense to me.
I am all for reducing emissions but this is simply a feel good bit of fluff with no real impact and is not enforceable. If you want to make changes push for a return of rail services to Toronto, push for a new bridge across the river in Owen Sound, push for the traffic lights to be better coordinated, push for a bus service that extends outside the city limits, push for good to be supplied locally not from outside the area or outside the country. Those changes would make a real difference!

PS With winter approaching I have more time to spend “on line” and will be “throwing my hat in the door” here and elsewhere more often, I hope that Shane and some of our other contributors can find more time to post a few articles here. Shane’s concept and community commitment is good but we must all participate on a regular basis if we expect anyone to come here and debate.

Heads up rural voters.

2007-10-24T13:06:00.000-04:00

Looks like another case of the urban based majority passing legislation without knowing all the ramifications upon the rural minority. I am aware of some voters having problems with our recent Provincial election regarding correct address or polling station, this could make the next Federal election a real problem unless corrected. Best keep our eyes on this one!

Canadian Press

OTTAWA – Recent changes to the federal Elections Act will wind up disenfranchising more than 1 million rural voters, Canada's elections watchdog warns.

Just four months ago in a bid to clamp down on voter fraud, Parliament amended the Canada Elections Act to require that each voter produce proof of identity and residential address before being allowed to cast a ballot.

But Elections Canada now says more than one million rural Canadians do not have a proper residential or civic address – complete with street name and number – as envisaged by the legislation.

More at:-
http://www.thestar.com/News/Canada/article/269681

Guest Opinion

2007-10-07T08:44:00.000-04:00

Its been well over a year now since Shane invited myself (and others) to contribute to his blog which was to focus on local issues. Whilst it may seem at times that I am the only “team member” that is not the case and I can only assume that unlike myself the others (including Shane) just simply do not have the time to devote to frequently be adding content here. In Shanes case he is doing something much more practical than merely spouting off on various blogs as I do, he is, as you all know running for election as our MPP in Grey Bruce. Regular readers will know that I don’t always agree with Shane or the Green leader Frank DeJong, that is of course how democracy works, the exchange of ideas and the open discussion of the problems and solutions. After much thought I have come to the conclusion that I shall vote for Shane Jolley on Wednesday and felt it only fair given my guest status on this blog that I should publicly endorse him here.

It is unfortunately, in these days of paid political bloggers, necessary to make it clear that I am not a member of the Green party and only have a passing acquaintance with Shane (apart from this blog) and therefore said endorsement and the following comments are entirely my own.

A recent bit in the Sun Times by Shane solidified my opinion, most of you will have seen it but for those outside the area here is an extract:-

“Too many times politicians make promises they cannot deliver on and wind up breaking them when they should have known better. Over the course of the campaign I have written and spoken about the types of policies I will be pushing on your behalf. While I know that I cannot realistically make all of these things happen, the following is, in plain terms, what you can expect of me when elected.
I will support the good legislation and oppose the bad, regardless of whose idea it is.
I will not be tied by party lines. The Greens do not have party whips. My accountability is to the people that elect me.
I will bring co-ordinated planning and vision and set measurable goals for the future of Grey/Bruce. I will demonstrate true leadership that does not cower in the face of challenge.
I will work very hard on behalf of the citizens of Grey/Bruce. I will think of your child's and grandchild's future as if it were the future of my own three children.
I will put my constituents first, my opinion second and party third. I will have a high attendance record in the legislature to make sure you are well represented.”

Irregardless of party policy it is the democratic process that we must protect, recent events on the Federal scene have shown how fragile that is, we must elect those who pledge to represent the people first and the party second. We must elect those who seek consensus not conflict, we must elect those who seek to make local economies part of the solution not part of the problem. Shane has clearly stated that he stands for these values, he is realistic in his goals, he says “If elected, the following are some of the policies I will be pushing for in the Ontario legislature….” NOT “If elected I will” which is a statement made by too many politicians who know full well it depends upon the wishes of the total legislature.

When I add the above statements to the previously documented support for local sustainability and moving away from centralization and globalization expressed by both Shane and the Green party, it makes the choice much easer. I have chosen to VOTE GREEN on October the 10th.

The Rural Minority and MMP.

2007-10-03T13:55:00.000-04:00

As the moment approaches to cast our votes for both our Provincial representatives and whether we wish to adopt a new method of doing so there is increasing debate on the pro and cons of MMP.
Firstly if you are not sure what MMP is or need more information check out my previous post here which contains several links to further information and this link to the Citizens Assembly final recommendations.
Please do check out the FACTS and form your own opinion, there has been a remarkable increase in the coverage of this issue in the MSM of late, unfortunately too little too late, and much of it biased for one side or another. I will not pretend to be unbiased on this but will try to present some of the reasons currently being forwarded for and against and rebut some of them.
Not surprisingly the leading established partys have generally came out against it however several well respected past politicians have endorsed it, as have most minority partys. This should indicate how most see it as affecting our representation, the smaller partys would be better represented and the larger partys less so due to the proportional nature of MMP.

One of the more recent objections to surface is that the proportionality will result in less representation for rural ridings and that the proposed larger ridings will also be a problem. I believe this is a bit of a red herring, rural folks are already “under represented” in the sense that rural issues are not very high on the governments agenda, even within the existing “rural” ridings the urban residents outnumber the rural residents and thus get more attention. It is not possible for rural folks to directly have more say in our legislature without skewing the system way out of proportion, we here in rural Ontario must educate the urban majority (and their representatives) as to the importance of the rural economy in maintaining their own well being. (for more opinion on that see my previous rant )
The MMP system should result in more variety of views being represented, less majority governments and lead to debate and compromise by our representatives. This is in my view a good thing and how parliament SHOULD work, we must simply elect candidates that are not puppets to the party line but can think (and vote) independently for or against a bill irregardless of which party brings it forward or is in power. It is this same probability of minority governments that some are citing as a reason to vote against MMP, I say minority governments are GOOD in that no one party can FORCE their agenda upon the people. It is true that the current thinking of “if its their idea” it must be wrong, only our vision is right, must end if it is to lead to stable governments.

The main stumbling block for both those for and against MMP is the manner in which the “extra” MPs necessary to make the house proportional are selected. These “list” seats will be selected from a list provided by the partys and published PROIR to the election. There is no guarantee as to how the party will select these proposed MPs comprising of 39 of the total 129 seats in the house, we must hope that the partys have enough sense to realize that if the list is filled with party flacks and backroom boys that the public would see it and not vote for that party. We must hope that they would use those seats (and no party has any idea of how many of their proposed MPs would actually be required to sit in the house) to ensure that some underrepresented group or area had additional representation, or to add a particular skill or knowledge to the group. But there is no guarantee that it will happen that way, but really, is that so much different from the way SOME partys select their candidates now, often high profile party people are “favored” by the partys over more representative local candidates. The proposal is not perfect but it is in my view an improvement over the current winner gets all system.

In that regard this from http://democraticspace.com/blog/ posted Oct 2nd…..
“As of today, the four largest parties in Ontario (Liberal, PC, NDP, Green) — accounting for 98.6% of the votes in 2003 — have all officially committed to holding democratic nominations for list candidates under the recommended mixed-member proportional (MMP) system. List candidates will have to do exactly what local candidates do now (and will continue to do under MMP) — rally support in their area, get their supporters to vote at the nomination meeting to secure the nomination, then face the general voters, who choose their preferences, rewarding effective individuals and parties, and punishing ineffective ones.” We must hope that the partys stand up to their promises.

The single biggest upside for myself is the ability to vote for the party and the candidate SEPERATLY! We have all (unless you are one of those folk who blindly vote for the party irregardless of other considerations) been in the situation of really wanting to vote for an articulate and sincere candidate who would add much to the house but afraid to do so. Perhaps because we do not agree with his partys platform or perhaps strongly dislike the leaders way of leading, or even the reverse in thinking that the existing party is doing a good job but do not like their local candidate. With MMP we can select the best local candidate irregardless of party affiliation and still separately vote for the party which we wish to lead the province. The reduction in “strategic” voting that will result will also add to a better representation in the house of our true wishes.

So there it is, a few things to think about, you can see which side I am on but you must make up your own mind. All I ask is that you do just that and do not let those with a vested interest in one side or the other make it up for you. Follow the links, research the facts, and VOTE.

Grey Bruce almost last!

2007-09-25T13:09:00.000-04:00

With the Ontario election rapidly approaching every little bit of information helps us to sort out who we are going to vote for. One particularly good source of information on anything to do with elections and / or the upcoming referendum is democraticSPACE.
A recent page lists the wealthiest ridings by family income, I’m not sure what use this information can be put to, but I found it interesting that Bruce- Grey- Owen Sound came 99th out of the 107 ridings. Bruce/Grey average family income is in the bottom 10 across Ontario.
Even the local average of $50,000 would I am sure be welcomed by many families in the area, I know we could live “high on the hog” on that kind of stipend! I still would not trade with anyone in the top of the list, income is not everything (but it sure does help eh!).
It does reinforce the need to listen to Shanes mantra of looking after our local economy first. At this point ANY job would look good to my son who has been looking since graduating last summer, its not easy for young folk to find a job localy.

MP Turner to host Owen Sound Town Hall.

2007-09-18T14:59:00.000-04:00

Federal Liberal and former Conservative, Garth Turner is to hold a “Town Hall” in Owen Sound on Sept 28th. Whether you agree with Garths point of view on Income trusts, consider his cross country town halls an effort to communicate, just a Liberal ploy, or just an opportunity to slag his former leader Mr Harper you must admit he does get around! Personally I admire his efforts to get a dialog going both face to face at his town halls and on his blog at http://www.garth.ca/weblog/ his commitment to on line debate and to putting his opinions in writing on that blog is a refreshing difference from the usual “spin”. Digital democracy is rapidly coming of age as evidenced by this whereby google has created a specialized search engine for the Australian election. Garth seems to be at the leading edge of this movement in Canada, here is your chance to talk to him personally on any of these issues.

Attendance at the Owen Sound meeting is free, and all are welcome to attend. Here are the details:
Thursday, September 27, 7 pm Owen Sound Legion, 1450 2nd Avenue, Owen Sound, Ontario.

More information here

Send the Message by Sending the Packaging!

2007-09-05T21:42:00.000-04:00

One of the most annoying waste problems is over-packaging. It is also one of the easiest to remedy, but government and business continue to turn a blind eye and a deaf ear to the issue.
So, a while back the Sierra Club of Canada came up with a brilliant and simple way to get the message across.
Check it out here. And have fun!

Hydro Bullies Are at it Again

2007-08-31T12:47:00.000-04:00

At times I feel that we as citizens of a democratic society have lost our will to fight for what is right; that we have we bought the myth that those with the power and money have the final say and our voices don’t count.

This feeling has resurfaced as I watch the grave injustice happening in Brockton, West Grey, and Southgate. Why is nobody debating the merit of the $600 million dollar hydro line expansion that is forcing the destruction of homes, farms, and businesses? Municipal councilors, landowners, and the media seem to have swallowed the lies of Hydro One hook, line and sinker about the need for this project.

Let’s start with the misleading name of this project, “Ontario’s green energy corridor”. This is “greenwashing” at its worst. It would be more accurately named “Ontario’s big money, private interest, oops we screwed up the contract so to hell with the landowner corridor”. Why should we care about the 61 year old small business owner who is losing his retirement home and his business that was to be passed on to his grandsons? Why should we care about the 76 year old single woman near Cedarville with nowhere to go? Or why should we care about the farmland being lost to production? We can just import more food from China right?

Aside from the unjust intrusions on people and land, let’s look at the economic and legal facts.

First of all, this project is NOT a done deal. There is a lengthy and in-depth environmental assessment process to be undergone, and Hydro One should be held to the letter of it, the same way you or I would be on our land.

Second and most tragically, this project is not in the least bit necessary, and is in fact based on regressive and outdated planning. Hydro One claims that without the hydro line expansion they do not have the capacity to deliver energy from renewable generation in Grey/Bruce. This is entirely false.

Here are the numbers. Reinforcements to the existing hydro line, which is the acceptable part of the current proposal, will increase transmission capacity from 5,000 megawatts to 7,300 megawatts. This is more than enough capacity to transmit ALL current and planned electricity production from Grey/Bruce up to the year 2013. Hydro One’s concern arises from “potential” energy production between 2013 and 2017 due to a contract committing Ontario to buy all power pruduced at Bruce Nuclear, whether or not there is sufficient transmission capacity. And no I am not joking. Hydro One committed the Ontario taxpayer to purchasing power that it knew in advance it may not be able to transmit! Now we are to foot another $600 million and throw people out of their homes to make good on that contract.

Back to the numbers. The capacity shortage between 2013-2017 assumes 100% operating capacity and efficiency from all generation sources in the region. Based on 2006 production, nuclear and wind operated at 69% and 28% respectively. Assuming similar numbers between 2013 and 2017 this means a total generation of 4873 megawatts. Subtract this from the total capacity of the existing reinforced lines (7,300 megawatts) and we have a surplus capacity of 2,427 megawatts.

It is possible that generation could surpass transmission capacity on a few select days during the period 2013-2017, but is that power worth $600 million dollars and the mistreatment of citizens in a democratic and just society?

The real issue is Hydro One not wanting to look bad for signing a foolish contract with a private company, Bruce Power.

The future of Ontario’s energy supply lies in the establishment of an affordable network of distributed renewable energy. This will require the government to provide aggressive incentives for a variety of small-scale energy projects including solar roofs, anaerobic digesters for farms, community scale wind turbines, geothermal heating and cooling, and many more. These systems will be grid tied but not require inefficient and intrusive power corridors that lose 20% of the energy in transit. A distributed system is the most affordable, reliable, and clean option for Ontario. While many nations are rapidly heading down this road our government still insists on investing in dinosaur technology at the taxpayer’s expense. Are special interests calling the shots here, or do we perhaps have a government that dislikes decentralized systems?

Whichever is the case, it’s time we rediscovered our spine. Councilors, stand up for your citizens, and they’ll thank you for it. And where do our current MPP and MP stand on this? If elected I will certainly not take such intrusions on our citizens lightly. The future viability of this region is at stake. It’s time to begin thinking long-term.

Indulge in Local Cuisine

2007-08-25T18:14:00.000-04:00

The Grey Bruce Agriculture & Culinary Association (GBACA) has teamed up with a number of local restaurants to promote local food. For the week of August 26 to September 1, local fare will be featured on menus in restaurants all over Grey Bruce.

This is the first event organized by the newly formed association, and the goals are to get more people to taste some locally produced cuisine and to become aware of what local cuisine is already being served in restaurants. Guy Anderson, a local honey producer and chair of the GBACA is spearheading the event. Anderson states, “It’s surprising to find out just how many local restaurants are already using local products, but just don’t advertise it.” They also want encourage restaurants who are not currently serving local products, to become more open to the idea.

During the week of August 26, visit any of the participating restaurants and ask about their local specials. The following 35 restaurants are participating in the “Indulge in Local Cuisine” week:

Kincardine

Harbour Street Brasserie
Pelican’s Roost
Best Western Governor’s Inn

Southampton

Drifting Sands Spa
Grosvenors
Mid Summer Café

Port Elgin

Andres Swiss Country Dining
Allen’s Fireside Grill
Aunt Mable’s Country Kitchen

Walkerton

Hartley House
Walker’s Landing
Simply Deli-cious

Tobermory

Grandview
Stone Orchid
Craigie’s Harbour View Restaurant

Hanover

Cravings
Grey Rose
Queen’s Bush

Ripley

A Simpler Thyme

Wiarton

Green Door Café
Wiarton Inn

Thornbury

The Dam Pub
The Mill Café

Owen Sound

Marketside Food Shop
Nathaniel’s Restaurant

Flesherton

Munshaw’s Bistro

Burgoyne

The Country Way

Lucknow

Finlayson’s

Neustadt

Noah’s Inn

Tiverton

Carmell’s

Meaford

Fisherman’s Wharf

Point Clark

Wooden Spoon Café

Wingham

Fireside Café

Walter’s Falls

The Falls Inn

Stokes Bay

Tamarac Island Inn

Durham

Chicory Common Café

Kimberley

Smokey’s Pub & Terrace Dining Room, Talisman Resort

When you purchase local products, you are not only getting the freshest food possible, but you’re supporting your local community, helping the environment, and you get to learn the whole story about what you are eating. If you would like to see more local products in restaurants, grocery stores, and other retail outlets, make sure you ask for it.

For more information on this event, local farms, farmers markets, and restaurants serving local food, visit www.foodlinkgreybruce.com or call 1-800-268-3838.

The Devil is in the Detail

2007-07-28T12:03:00.000-04:00

Well guys, its now been more than a month since anyone other than myself has posted anything on these pages. Seems like its time to get something a little more controversial going to liven things up, what better subject than politics to do that. Given that Shane has been nominated as the GPO candidate for this area and that I like much of what he has to say, I took some time to examine the GPO platform. Let me start by saying that I fully agree with the Green Partys Ten Key Values , however some of the GPOs proposals leave me wondering if they should remove their rose colored glasses! There is very little proposed that is not desirable, but is it achievable in a practical way?

One of the first things that struck me was that the proposals seem to have fallen into the usual trap that all political partys have difficulty with. Promising the world without any real detail of how to get there and at what cost, as has been said time and time again “the devil is in the details”. I will try and illustrate a few of my concerns and invite Shane and Frank to put my mind at rest so that I can more fully support the Green Party platform.

“In the Green Party plan, nuclear expansion would be halted, bringing coal offline first, followed by nuclear generation, as electricity consumption decreases, and the level of renewables in the mix increases.”
We have had this discussion before on these pages so I will not dwell upon it, this is a very good objective but I’m not at all convinced that it will not lead to hydro shortages and the need to import power from those Ohio coal fired plants. I believe we must at least have some nuclear expansion until such time as we have other reliable generation methods developed. I do not believe that the amount of hydro saved by increased efficiencies and consumer actions will offset the steadily increasing population of Ontario, although the closure of so many manufacturing plants and folk leaving for jobs in the west may solve this one for us!
“A focus on distributed, smaller scale, consumer invested generation of renewable energy, rather than mega-projects”
This is indeed the way to go particularly in rural areas, I don’t know how effective it would be in the large cities, particularly in Toronto, our largest user of power. The use of homeowner wind and solar generation linked to the grid will in the future be the way to go but I don’t see any massive move toward that goal happening anytime soon due to the high capital cost. It all helps but on a dark windless night in the middle of winter when it is 25 below the demand for other generated power will still be there. I do support the encouragement of passive solar homes where possible but once again it is a very long term goal with only a small impact and simply not possible for most homes and apartments in a large city.

“Ontario produces mountains of garbage expecting rural citizens to bury it in their neighborhoods. The policy of ignoring the garbage issue unfairly burdens municipalities with what is clearly provincial jurisdiction.”
A bit simplistic in my view, I have no problem with rural residents dealing with their own garbage and most are substantially reducing their volumes with recycling programs. It is the high volume from the cities being trucked out to rural sites that bother me, the inability of apartment dwellers to easily divert their waste into multiple streams and the ever increasing amount of “packaging” to be disposed off. ALL new apartment buildings should be mandated to have a system for multiple streams (2 or 3 garbage chutes or other storage accommodations) and we need incentives for existing apartment owners to retro fit suitable systems.
“Incineration is a non-solution because of the expense, inevitable toxic emissions and the problem of the toxic fly ash, an acidic toxic composite, representing 30% of the original bulk, which must be buried in a hazardous waste site………………. The first step in moving towards sustainable waste management is opposing new landfills and expansions to eliminate this environmentally damaging alternative to real solutions.”
OK! So no land fills, no incineration, does ANYONE really believe we can achieve 100% recycling? There is absolutely no doubt that we can do a great deal better on this front but there will always be some material to be disposed off. The question then becomes which method of disposal has the least impact on our future and what will realistically be the volumes in 5, 10 or 20 years.

“The Green Party of Ontario proposes a tax shift from property taxes to a land value tax……………..An empty lot or one-storey building in a downtown core would be taxed at the same rate as a high-rise apartment building.” I have already had a few things to say about this and have yet to see a detailed rebuttal giving what impact this would have upon the individual homeowner left holding the burden of supporting all those apartment dwellers. This proposal alone would be sufficient for me to reconsider my general support of Green party ideals should it ever see the light of day.

“The Green Party of Ontario announced today that it supports a move toward a single school public system in Ontario”. I agree with this one 100%, unfortunately the Catholic school boards are going to fight this one tooth and nail, I don’t really understand why, as separate religious instruction or even better, a broad curriculum covering all religions could easily be accommodated. With some proposing to go in the opposite direction and fund even more religious based schools I think we should end this segregation before it gets out of hand.
“The money saved with a single school board system would allow Ontario to better serve all children by providing the basic necessities of a proper education. Schools would be able to offer smaller classes, afford more textbooks, hire more teachers, in-school nurses and counselors, and increase access to new physical and outdoor education programs, nutrition programs and many other services that most school boards can no longer afford.”
If anyone really expects the amalgamation of the two school systems to really do all this then their tinted glasses are obscuring their vision again. No doubt there would be some savings, but given that by far the most cost is for teachers salaries and benefits which would change little, one must ask what kind of math they are using!
“The GPO will reduce tuition to a minimal fee, as is the case in most European countries………….. Tuition is a tax on education. We should be taxing bads not goods. A post-secondary degree is required for 75% of the jobs in this province.”
I must be moving in the wrong circles, only 25% of jobs are available to high school graduates? Come on get real!! If this were true then someone had better start securing some employment for the average Joe, it does not take a degree to be a smart, contentious, hard working employee in fact sometimes the two are exclusive. As for reducing fees to a minimum, a laudable goal but I do not see why I as a taxpayer should pay for someone else’s advanced education unless they are required to repay the system when they start making those “big bucks”. There should be continuing programs to help selected deserving students who cannot afford the debt to pursue professions such as medical or other much needed services, but not a blanket ticket.

"The MOE and the MNR need to be given stronger mandates and more influence in setting government policy and direction,"…………….. "Properly funding the MOE and MNR is a step in the right direction, but it will make little difference as long as major decisions affecting Ontario's air and water quality, soil and forests are made not by the MOE or the MNR, but by the Ministries of Finance, Energy and Transportation.”
I agree that the MNR needs to be given the funding to carry out its mandate which is not the case now, the MOE must also be overhauled but appears to be so entrenched in bureaucracy as it now exists that some basic changes need to be made first to make it more efficient and responsive. The point is well made that too many departments and organizations have their little piece of the pie on this one.
One example of the difficulties experienced by a local landowner highlights the lack of coordination on this one. An owner of one of the last historic water powered mills in the area wanted to restore the mill for future generations to see, he also was considering the installation of water powered generation using the existing mill race. You would think that this would get encouragement from all levels of government but he was simply overwhelmed with the number of permits and departments which became involved, most of whom were intent upon putting road blocks up for this project. MOE, MNR, SVCA, Dept Fisheries and Oceans and three levels of government and probably several other authorities were consulted. The generation project has been abandoned, the restoration effort continues.

As I said at the start the devil is in the details and I for one just don’t have enough information to really see if these ideas are achievable at an acceptable cost, and I don’t just mean monetary cost. So have at it guys, let us get some dialog going, help me make some decisions for the upcoming Provincial election.

e

ENVIRONMENTAL FILM FESTIVAL

2007-07-22T09:23:00.000-04:00

11-18 August 2007
Bruce Peninsula Bird Observatory and Bruce Peninsula Environment Group are hosting a festival of environmental films from 11th.-18th August
The film Festival will be a mixture of Classic films and documentaries each with an environmental theme.
The Classic films will be introduced by Stephen Scharper, associate professor at the University of Toronto with 7 years of teaching in film studies. The films will be followed by an optional discussion led by Stephen Scharper. All films except 'Winged Migration' will be shown in the Anglican Church Hall, Lion's Head at 7p.m.

Program.

Saturday 11th. August Classic Film The Grapes of Wrath.
This poignant adaptation of John Steinbeck’s gritty Depression-era classic is on most top 50 film lists. It established Henry Fonda as a star, and brought legendary director John Ford’s arresting cinematic gifts to a gripping Dust Bowl Stations of the Cross. Following the travails of the Joad family, as they lose their land to eroded soil and eroded values, the film highlights the role of land in the sustaining of both personal and social relationships. A classic not to be missed.

Sunday 12th. Classic Film Babette's Feast.
Director: Gabriel Axel
Based on a short story by Isak Dinesen, this is quite simply one of the most beautiful and lavish feast films ever produced. Tracing the story of Babette, a refugee from France who flees to a remote, pietistic community in Jutland, the film is a deeply stirring celebration of the power of food, sensuousness and gratitude to build and restore community. The relationship Babette forms through her culinary artistry with both the austere community and the landscape that welcomed her, points to a deeper connection between the fruits of the earth and the gifts of spiritual grace.

Tuesday 14th. Documentary: Refugees of the Blue Planet.
Directors: Helen Cuoquette, Jean-Phillipe Duval
“The Refugees of the Blue Planet is a hard-hitting documentary that examines the lives of environmental refugees on the sinking island of Maldives, the eucalyptus plantations of Brazil and the tar sands of Canada. These are people who have been displaced from their homes and communities because of the devastating affects of environmental abuse and over-development due to big business and big industry.” —Human Rights Film Festival
This documentary shows that the environmental crisis is following the same fault line of social, economic and political and racial oppression. As distinct from “Deep Ecology,” this film presents a “Social Ecology,” emphasizing the interaction between humans, social justice and the environment.

Thursday 16th. Documentary: Winged Migration (at National Park Camp Amphitheatre 7p.m.)
Director: Jacques Perri, Jacques Cluzaud
“An odyssey over three years in the making, Winged Migration certainly is an amazing experience to behold. Its most impressive and moving achievement is its ability to draw the viewer into an almost foreign world, traveling along with a myriad of bird species as they undertake their semi-annual migrations over vast distances.”—Dana Rowader, All Movie Guide
Nominated for an academy award for best documentary, this extraordinary film gives a “bird’s eye” glimpse of the perils and exhilaration of annual bird migration. For unfeathered bipeds who walk upright, i.e., “us,” this film invites the human into a different world of wonder and challenge concerning how other species survive and navigate this planet.

Friday 17th. Documentary: Who Killed the Electric Car?
Director: Chris Paine
In 1905 there were over 300 electric car service stations in the city of Boston, Massachusetts. The Studebaker museum in South Bend, Indiana currently houses the top-of-the-line 1903 electric car produced by the Studebaker brothers. If you want to know what happened to amazing technological innovation, this film is a must-see. Focusing on the EV-1 of General Motors produced to be in compliance with recent California zero-emission legislation; this compelling documentary shows the complex interface between environmental policies, the corporate bottom line, consumer preference and ecological sustainability.

Saturday 18th Classic Film: Modern Times
Director: Charlie Chaplin
The final appearance of Charlie Chaplin as “the tramp,” this is Chaplin’s most overtly political film and one of his most popular. At once hilarious and prophetic, Modern Times descries the dehumanizing mechanism of urban industrialization while celebrating the unstinting wellsprings of the human spirit and of nature. Co-staring Paulette Goddard, the film’s depiction of Chaplin striving to keep up with the unrelenting assembly line, or his precarious roller-skating in a department store, remain cinematic gems. The film’s conclusion underscores the importance of landscape and nature, as opposed to the urban factory milieu as the proper, life-giving habitat for the human.
$10 per film or $25 for a passport to all films.
For more information and tickets contact Ron Baker, 519-795-7652.

Sponsored by Bruce Peninsula Bird Observatory and Bruce Peninsula Environment Group with assistance of the Bruce Peninsula National Park. Proceeds from the Festival will support the Migration Monitoring program of BPBO at Cabot Head.

Municipal Tax Base

2007-07-03T10:36:00.000-04:00

With the recent discussion on this blog regarding property tax, municipal funding, and urban sprawl , see this, I have been thinking about the alternatives offered by the GPO leader and by the Mad River Institute. The first thing I will say that I entirely agree with the Mad River study that disentanglement is essential, Provincial programs and other areas of responsibility must be delivered and paid for at the Provincial level. I will not say more on this as the above document clearly lays out the problem with the downloading of programs and services from the province.
The focus of the previous discussion was upon how to set the base upon which our municipal funding (property tax) is calculated. There seems to be a general agreement that the current system needs to be changed but no agreement upon the solution. Some even say that it is so regressive that it should be eliminated, but then how do we fund our local services? I do not believe another level of income tax would be found acceptable or is appropriate. Proposals range from taxing the area of land owned by the property owner to setting the base value by evaluating the number of bedrooms, garage spaces, bathrooms and / or including the owners income in the formula.
I must say that I prefer the latter rather than the former but do not believe than we can (or should) bring the owners income into this particular calculation. Apart from the problem of allowing increased access to this personal information and coordinating it with data regarding the number and type of rooms in a residence, it would fluctuate each year making things even more complex and almost impossible to predict. Just basing it upon the room use alone has some merit but why make it so complex.
It seems to me that simply setting the base value upon the square footage (total floor space) of the residence would address just about all of the issues brought up. A house with 2400sq ft would be valued at twice that of one at 1200 sq ft and an apartment of 600 sq ft at half of that. Issues of whether to include attached (or detached) buildings such as garages would have to be addressed but it would seem that, at least in regard to residential buildings, that simple floor area covers all the bases. Those with more area probably have more residents or have made a choice to purchase or build a large house, those with more modest accommodation the reverse. There will be some exceptions but I believe they will be few, let us know if you think of any.
Using this formula, apartment buildings with modest floor space per tenant would be taxed at less PER FAMILY than the typical house giving at least some incentive to build MODEST accommodation of this type. Sizable condos, or apartments would pay a larger share in the same ratio as larger home would.
Commercial and industrial buildings could be assessed the same way, and in downtown areas where residential apartments exist above commercial enterprises they would be assessed the same but could be taxed at different rates, as is the case now, by setting the mill rates for the various uses.

I offer the following in support of this method.

It is simple and easily understood.
It is easily calculated and little room for disagreement exists.
This data is required for building permits and already exists in Municipal records.
It blends the criteria of size, services required, ability to pay almost automatically.
It will not change over time unless additional floor space is added.
It is independent from local or regional market values.
Municipalities continue to set the mill rate as required or desired for each type of use.

That would seem to work in urban areas but what of rural areas, farms, smallholdings, large areas of productive or non productive land, forests (managed or not). Should these be taxed just based upon the residence? For a non commercial rural residence I really don’t see why not, the extra land which they may own does not use any Municipal services and in many cases as “green space” helps offset the acres of concrete that is unavoidable in urban areas. This is already recognized to some extent by the Managed Forest Tax Rebate program that reduces taxes upon areas maintained as sustainable wood lots. This was a provincial rebate but now has been mostly downloaded to Municipalities further eroding their income. If Rural residents are taxed solely upon the residential floor space this program could be eliminated as ALL residential land not build upon would simply not come into the equation. The availability of such land would continue to be dictated by supply and demand and Municipal zoning as it is now, the change in tax status should have little effect. It is probable that well kept properties with a high market value may pay less, whilst poorly upkept ones with a low market value would pay a larger share than at present, but homes of equal size would pay equal taxes.

That leave the most difficult one, productive farm land, how do we assess it and tax it?
The assessment becomes a little more difficult and harder to define here. Land that is used for crops or grazing is producing income and is in fact part and parcel of a “commercial” operation whether we should tax it at all or at some low rate is questionable. The debate comes down to this. When considering Municipal taxes on a property how does it impact upon Municipal costs? Clearly there is an impact upon our rural roads, heavy farm machinery traveling from field to field does require additional road maintenance so it may be necessary to have an assessment of productive land (that being land not built upon, forested, or clearly non productive) which Municipalities could base a mill rate upon, be that very low or even zero in support of those who produce our food.
There are a few more wrinkles out here in the country, and perhaps the same applies to commercial and industrial operations in urban areas also. What of farm buildings, machinery dealers and the like who use an area of land for commercial purposes over and above the actual floor area of their building. In fairness the same question must be asked, what impact upon Municipal services do these areas have? It would seem very little, whilst it might be desirable to heavily tax operations that use up productive farm land for other than farming, that is a zoning issue NOT a taxation issue to me. The same applies to Intensive livestock operations, clearly these are either commercial or industrial buildings and should be classed as such.

So it would seem that in summary that if we classify each structure as Residential, Commercial, or Industrial and tax them based upon floor area, that with few exceptions it would be much fairer, PROVIDED that we are funding ONLY Municipal services and NOT downloaded social services, conservation, managed forest rebates and the like. It is interesting to note that ANY major changes in MUNICIPAL tax structure can only be changed through the PROVINCIAL government who set the rules for municipalities to follow!
What do you think?

Day of Action

2007-06-29T16:33:00.000-04:00

Today has been proclaimed a “National Day of Action” by the Assembly of First Nations. Consider this my action.

The need for such a day is driven by the unconscionable length of time it takes governments to resolve almost anything concerning our First Nations. There are 91 First Nations’ communities under boil water advisories, some of which have lasted as long as nine years. By contrast, the water advisory in Vancouver was headline news every one of its 12 days. The average land claim with the federal government in Ontario is 16 years old. In a case documented by the Indian Claims Commission, a First Nation hired a lawyer in 1885 when an Indian Agent sold some of their land and stole the proceeds. It took 120 years to settle the case. Would the media and the Hope Bay cottagers stay silent for another 119 years? Why do we permit such blatant double standards?

Much of the First Nations’ poverty and living conditions far below the Canadian standard result from the relationships among levels of government in Canada. Studies recommending upgrading of school systems, environmental protections and innovation in health care for First Nations sit on the shelf getting yellow because education, environment and health care are provincial issues, while the people themselves are the responsibility of the federal government. This gives both tiers a constant rationale for inaction and we, by silence, allow it.

This federal/provincial divide becomes almost unbelievable in the case of land near Deseronto belonging to the Tyindenaga band. The federal government has acknowledged that the land is the band’s, never having been ceded by the Mohawks of the Bay of Quinte. Representatives from the band council and the federal government have been in negotiations since last November over what form the compensation for the land theft might take. While they sit at the negotiating table, the Ontario government has licensed a private company to remove 10,000 truckloads of gravel per year from a quarry on the property. Not only is the very land being removed, but in the most shameful irony of all, industrial and toxic waste, including asphalt from provincial highways, is being dumped on the property and is leaching into the water.

The situation in Caledonia is more complex. This region has the most land claims in Ontario. In school we all learned that the Six Nations were given six miles either side of the Grand River from mouth to source, in perpetuity, in gratitude for their support of the British in the American Revolution. It took a mere eight years for that 385,000 hectares to be reduced to 111,000 hectares in a surrender forced by the Lieutenant Governor and some of the remaining land was subsequently sold, including what is now the city of Brantford. Whether Six Nations’ land was lawfully sold or leased is complicated by the legal question “who has, or had, the authority to make decisions for the people of First Nations?”

The direct action of occupation may appear aggressive and even illegal, but continuing to build family homes, dig gravel or dump waste on disputed land will clearly only slow and complicate the land claim process further and must stop until settlements are reached. We have centuries of evidence of the results of polite negotiations between white people and the First Nations, and it seems that the playing field is not getting any more level nor the game any faster under the present system.

Our own regional history is one of aggressive occupation. In 1763 the Crown acknowledged the rights of the First Nations to the land and water of all the Bruce Peninsula, Saugeen watershed and Lake Huron, signing treaties assuring that those rights would be defended. Agents of the Crown subsequently forced huge land concessions with terror tactics, exploiting fears of the people of the First Nations that they would not be protected against the aggression of white settlers desperate for land. Rights to resources, commerce and livelihood were never conceded, as court decisions of the past decade have upheld.

Treaties are not land sale transactions. They are agreements between nations for peaceful relationships assuring mutual benefits, trade, rights and livelihood for future generations. The signators may have been governments, but the responsibilities are ours. The Assembly of First Nations’ website www.afn.ca has suggestions for positive action including informing ourselves and asking our representatives for real progress.

In a few days it will be Canada’s 140th birthday. We can celebrate and be proud of this country only insofar as we are willing to work for justice and a high quality of life for all.

Community Garden Opening

2007-06-24T14:31:00.000-04:00

Please accept this invitation to attend our opening of the Community Garden,
Li Saydr and Trwaw Soeur,

Tuesday, June 26 at 12:30 noon.
Owen Sound Metis Centre
380 9th St. E.

We will be glad to show you what is growing and what we are ‘plotting’.

Trwaw Soeur (Three Sisters Garden)
Corn, Beans, Squash with Mixed Vegetables, Herbs and Fruits

Li Saydr (The Cedar)
Indigenous Herb and Food Garden

How We Got Started

Metis Nation of Ontario provided incentive and some start-up equipment. United Way provided space and enthusiasm. Home Depot, Meridian and our friends provided financial donations and hard-working, dedicated men and women provided ideas, wisdom, experience, and labour to make this happen.

Our Philosophy and Commitment

Our site offers opportunity to plant, nurture, harvest and use fresh produce, grown by your hands. We offer assistance and instruction in all aspects of gardening, with emphasis on teachings about the aboriginal approach to our relatives which nurture and sustain us.

We are committed to sustainable environmental practices, composting, water conservation, and natural pest control. We promote and teach organic and companion planting. We not only grow medicines, fruits and vegetables, we intend hope for our collective future, and strengthened community, as we work, learn and play together.

Our garden is open to everyone, even those who simply wish to come in, sit, and watch the green things grow.

Membership

Everyone is welcome.

* Plots are awarded on a first come, first served basis and a waiting list is available.
* Members must commit to garden organically. We do not use synthetic pesticides and fertilizers or any harmful chemicals.
* As organic gardeners, we focus on building healthy soil and learning to garden in harmony with the environment.
* Members will complete some volunteer service at various work bees or events during gardening season.

We benefit from volunteers who will:

Help with garden maintenance
Share gardening knowledge and expertise and
Assist with our educational programs
Donate gardening tools, lawn chairs, plants and seeds, financial support

For more information please call 370-0435, The Community Garden Committee

Fair isn't the same as Equal

2007-06-22T16:34:00.001-04:00

When I was growing up, most of our “public” buildings – libraries, schools, city halls, courts, even hospitals - had big front doors with long flights of stone steps leading up to them. They were monuments to the value the community placed on what was inside: literacy, civility, education, justice and compassionate care. They stood in prominent places and we were very proud that they were public and available to everyone. We lived in a society where everything was fair and equal.

Somewhere between then and now we realized the irony. The very buildings themselves were barriers to those who were not physically able to climb those stairs. So we built ramps and elevators, and widened the doorways and lowered the sinks in the bathrooms. Over time we have added Braille signs on bank machines, special parking spots, chirping stoplights, telephones with volume control, and have brought services out of those buildings and into the community with talking books and home care, on-line government services and health advice by telephone. Because we value fairness and equality, we have put access to these public services into legislation, as in the Ontarians with Disabilities Act.

But there is one more barrier that we really struggle even to speak about. It will always be unfair for the poor.

Part of the challenge is recognizing our own set of advantages. George W. Bush seems to have difficulty understanding the real lives of the American people because, as some clever observer noted, “he was born on third base and thinks he hit a triple.” I often hear that people who live on Ontario Works or pensions or minimum wage should just learn to live within their means. But statistically the rest of us, those who pay a smaller percentage of our income on essentials like housing and food, aren’t coming close to living within our means. We are racking up record consumer debt in Canada, yet we who have more income also have all sorts of cushions to delay the consequences of poor money management or spending habits– cash advances on credit cards, lines of credit, overdraft protection and relatives with money - and statistics show we use these regularly. The poor are penalized with a clawback for making a mistake on a form or misunderstanding the rules. Their credit options are limited to the brutal fees and interest rates of “pay day loans”, typically up $100 on a $300 loan, an effective annual interest rate of 435 per cent on a 14-day loan.

We also think we can have fairness for everyone if those who can, buy their own services. At a public meeting about health care at the Bayshore, we discussed efficiencies in the health care system, doctor shortages, and the merits of publicly-funded, privately-delivered services. One woman made a statement that was met with lots of nods because it sounded reasonable and fair. She said “If I, who can afford it, pay for my service at a private hospital or clinic, that will get me out of the waiting list and help someone else, who can’t afford it, move up in the list in the public hospital.” It took me a moment to realize the flaw in the logic. Of course she would not be the only one leaving the public system for that private clinic. Her surgeon, most likely trained in a public Canadian university, would have also left for the private clinic, leaving a vacancy in the public system and adding to the wait time. The experience thus far is that the patients left behind are also those the private system cannot accommodate – people with multiple health challenges, the very elderly, and those with the least supports in the family and community. These patients require the highest degree of care, have longer hospitalizations and subsequently cost more to treat in the public system. Those without private means or insurance, who statistically also have poorer health, are left waiting in longer lines in the public system while the taxpayer pays both the physicians and the shareholders in the “publicly funded, privately run for profit” clinics and hospitals.

Of course, the poor weren’t there to speak for themselves at the meeting, because there’s no bus still running after the meeting to take them home.

Public buildings with stairs were not fair, not because the services inside were not the same for everyone, but because everyone who used them was not the same.
Fair is not the same as equal. Fair is about outcomes. People who don’t have to show proof of income to get what they need. Successful children. Healthy adults. Engaged citizens participating in their community.

Electoral Reform Referendum Question Released

2007-06-21T08:13:00.000-04:00

The Ontario Government has released the referendum question on electoral reform for the October 10th provincial election.
The first referendum question in more than 85 years will ask voters, "Which electoral system should Ontario use to elect members to the provincial legislature?"
Ontarians will choose one of two options: the existing "first past the post" electoral system or the mixed member proportional system proposed by the 104-member Citizens' Assembly on Electoral Reform.
It took months to draft the question, which will be presented in English and French.
http://www.cfra.com/headlines/index.asp?cat=1&nid=50306

At least 60 per cent of voters will have to support the new system, including more than half the voters in 60 per cent of the ridings, for it to take effect beginning with the first election following the Oct. 10 vote.
How many voters understand the two alternatives will be the key, at this point many are not even aware the process is talking place and few really understand the alternate proposal. I really hope this gets a lot more attention between now and October.

Land Value Taxation - Bring Assessment into the 21st Century?

2007-06-19T16:42:00.001-04:00

I think anyone who has had a serious look at the current municipal taxation and assessment system agrees that there are serious flaws and inequities. One proposed solution is LVT or Land Value Taxation. The following is reprinted from Frank de Jong's blog.

Property taxes and sprawl

Kelley and I received our final property tax bill for 2007 in the mail yesterday. Along with these bills there are always inserts explaining all the numbers. For land use activists they make interesting reading.

Note that City Council arbitrarily sets the tax rate differently for the various types of buildings and zonings. Most shocking is that houses are taxed at 0.5% of their property value while apartments pay a whopping 2.0%. It is grossly unfair that apartment properties must pay at 4 times the rate as house dwellers.

It gets worse. Let's take two identical sized lots, side by side. On one lot is a house worth $500,000 and on the other is a 10-unit building worth $5 million. Since the apartment building is worth 10 times more than the house and since the city taxes multi-unit buildings at 4 times the rate as houses, the city generates 40 times the revenue from this apartment building as from the house next door on the same sized lot.

No wonder rents are so high and condo are so expensive. And no wonder cities and towns are surrounded by horrendous sprawl instead of being designed as walkable communities linked by transit. Developers can't afford to build multi-unit buildings unless they charge extremely high rent.

The policy of Land Value Taxation (also called Location Value Taxation) is to require Ontario municipalities to shift property taxes off buildings and onto the land below the buildings. MPAC would assess only the land and then the city would apply one tax rate to all land within each zoning. This system is used in 700 jurisdictions around the world encouraging optimal density without sprawl.

If the land under multi-unit buildings were taxed equally to the land under houses, rents would plummet and condo prices would drop, providing affordable housing without government subsidies. If cities right-valued land through LVT, walkable communities would be built rather then car-dependent, energy-wasting, socially-isolating, culturally-barren, suburban sprawl.

Posted by Frank de Jong, GPO leader.

For more on this see the Winnipeg example at The Progress Report, and an interesting proposal called the "Local Reform Initiative" from the Mad River Institute in Creemore. Look under "Reports and Opinions".

Organic vs. Local Food

2007-06-18T13:16:00.001-04:00

In the face of both increasing safety risk and economic risk to our domestic food supply, consumers are becoming more aware of the need for both locally grown and organic foods. In the past these two concepts, "local" and "healthy" were essentially one and the same.
Today the conscientious consumer sometimes has to make the choice between local and organic as it is sometimes difficult to achieve both simultaneously.

The following article from the May 30th Globe and Mail illustrates the increasing corporatization and processing of organic food.

Has big business turned organics into 'yuppy chow'?

MICHAEL VALPY

SASKATOON — Organic food is being taken over by big business, marketed as "yuppie chow" for the privileged, and increasingly packaged with as little concern for the environment as conventional food production, says a York University academic researcher.
In a paper to be presented on Friday at Canada's largest gathering of social sciences scholars, Irena Knezevic says that most of the major organic brands on the North American market are now owned by large corporations such as ConAgra, Cargill, Kraft, Coca Cola and Pepsi.
She says their products - along with those sold by retail giants such as Loblaws and Wal-Mart - are turning organic agriculture into product brands that are becoming "a marketing tool more so than an assurance of quality, let alone an assurance of a fair and sustainable production process."
Officials from Loblaws and Wal-Mart were unavailable for comment last night.
This trend, says Ms. Knezevic, is driven by consumer demand, with the food industry's eager willingness to jump on the bandwagon and make organic consumption efficient and slightly less expensive by mass-producing - creating only a slightly "greener" version of the dominant industrial food system but separating organic agriculture from its central concepts.
She says consumers are demonstrating a phenomenal enthusiasm for organic products - the Canadian organic industry is growing by 15 to 20 per cent annually - and a readiness to pay premium prices for the products.
But what research shows, she says, is that organic products are becoming what she describes as a food fetish associated with individual health and body image - status food linked to high disposable income and the leisure time to shop - but ignoring "the heart of organic agriculture."
"Organic agriculture is by definition intertwined with environmentalism, resistance to corporate globalization and the 'back to the land' movement," she says.
Organic food is conventionally defined as free of chemical inputs - pesticides and artificial fertilizers - and genetically modified organisms, produced with sensitivity to the land, the crops, the animals and the surrounding ecosystems, and providing a fair economic return to small growers who produce food as an alternative to mass commodity production.
It is the environmental and social-justice issues that Ms. Knezevic says are being ignored by consumers and government regulators.
"Most of the organic food supply in Canada travels to consumers from California and includes convenience foods like individual-sized and single-serving granola bars. Transportation and packaging involved result in environmental consequences comparable to those of conventional food production."
In her paper, she quotes George Siemon, the founder of the largest North American co-operative organic producer, California's Organic Valley - a non-corporate grower - as wryly telling a recent conference: "We expect any day now that our consumers will ask for organic Twinkies. Individually wrapped, of course."
Ms. Knezevic says the Canadian federal government's proposed national labelling for organic foods will tell consumers little about how organic food is produced - little about who produced it or the farmers' environmental and sustainable stewardship of the land, whether the food was locally produced or what economic return farmers got for their labour.
The proposed labelling, she says, will only continue to distance consumers from their food and are mainly aimed at encouraging both mass production and exports into a globally harmonized market.
Indeed, she says, the regulations will encourage corporations to take over more and more of organic agriculture because government subsidies favour large producers over small ones.
Achim Mohssen-Beyk, an organic farmer from Picton, Ont., said that big companies may meet the basic standards for organic certification in Canada, but the consumer will never know about the environmental or social footprints they leave.
"All the food mileage and mass production, the organic certification doesn't talk about that. You can have certified organic coming from China and people being exploited there and nobody's talking about that," said Mr. Mohssen-Beyk, who is also a regional spokesman for the Canadian Organic Growers. He said small, local farmers can't compete with the price-point advantages of big companies, even though they maintain the highest of standards.
"We are losing farms, we are losing farmland, we are losing rural economies because everything is being imported."
Ms. Knezevic quotes a National Farmers Union study that says small-farm income in Canada is now at the lowest point since the Depression.
Ms. Knezevic is a doctoral candidate in the joint York-Ryerson Universities communication and culture program. Earlier this year, she was given a major teaching award by York and cited for her research skills and commitment to the mentoring and academic success of her students.
She will present her research to the annual Congress of the Humanities and Social Sciences being held this week at the University of Saskatchewan. There are 5,500 scholars attending.
She writes in her paper: "Organic foods have less and less to do with the ethics of environmentalism, anti-globalization and social justice, indeed less to do with organic agriculture as a concept, but more and more with hip consumerism, cultural and economic capital and the moral pedestals of those who have the luxury to make such purchasing choices."
What is being created, she says, is "a system in which organic products are more and more removed from the actual problems with food production and incorporated into the dominant agricultural model. The core problems of the global food system, mainly distancing, remain unaddressed."

So, what should be the priority of health and community minded consumers?

My experience is that if you have to choose between organic and local, go with local first. This is especially true if you know and trust the local producer. Knowing the producer means that you can also know how your food was produced, with what inputs, and under what conditions. You will also get fresher food and give a much needed boost to the local agricultural economy.
Many local producers are moving to more "natural" production methods. These foods may not be certified organic, but may in fact be healthier due to freshness and less processing. They will also not be contributing to CO2 emissions from long distance travel.

If you cannot buy an item from a local producer, then by all means purchase organic from the grocery store as it will almost certainly be healthier than the non-organic product next to it.

Maybe in the future we'll be able once again to buy the majority of our food from local producers we know and trust, and see agriculture flourish once again. Supporting the local producers and markets that do exist will help get us there. A few of these are listed in the right sidebar.