Supreme Court Decision

On Thursday, the Supreme Court of Canada decided that a private developer should be granted permission to develop a year round ski and recreational complex in the Kootenay region of British Columbia. The Ktunaxa First Nation had opposed the development on the grounds that their religious freedoms were being infringed upon. According to the CBC " The Ktunaxa believe the project will drive Grizzly Bear Spirit from Qat'muk, the traditional name for the spiritual territory, and permanently impair their religious beliefs and spiritual practices" (CBC).

I could never be a supporter of anyone or any company who believed that what we really need  is another tourist destination. Once developers start redefining the landscape - the landscape, the people the scenery all change. One only needs to look at what happened to Whistler, Golden, Canmore or Banff to see how the natural beauty of a place has been fundamentally altered in the pursuit of money. Mountain vistas that were once within the public's right to see and enjoy become private property marred by ski trails. mountain bike trails, chair lifts and expensive chalets.  I will always argue that the gain in seasonal jobs is a poor trade off for outside investors' personal gain.

Having said all of the above, I agree with the justices of the Supreme Court. While such a development maybe tasteless and not needed, the faith of one group should not have the right to prevent what most people would assume is the right of the world to grow and evolve - even if we do not agree with the direction it is growing.

Some First Nations advocates will argue that this is just one more bit of proof that the white hierarchy is continuing on in its agenda of intentionally destroy First Nation cultures. That if the state had any real commitment to reconciliation, that it would not allow such development. There is of course one fundamental flaw in this argument. In the past - the Supreme Court has fairly constantly ruled in favour of First Nation issues. They did so long before governments or Canadians in general became empathetic or even aware of what those issues were. In fact, it was the decisions of the Supreme Court that exposed both governments and citizens to the injustices of government policies. First Nations need to be careful that in one breath they use previous Supreme Court decisions to their advantage and at the next breath condemn the institution. It leaves First Nations vulnerable to accusations of just "playing the political game"

Similarly First Nations need to be careful of waving the reconciliation flag every time something happens that they do not agree with. The overwhelming obligation of Canadians to accept the implications and consequences of colonialism does not mean that every decision needs to be designed to rectify our nation's past wrongdoings. To suggest overly frequently that reconciliation should be the primary concern of everything from Supreme Court decisions to how we name elementary schools - will exhaust the public, detract power from the word and allow people to forget why it is both an important process and obligation.

Our public institutions will continue to make decisions that irritate people. Specifically the Supreme Court is part of an adversarial process. There are, therefore winners and losers in every decision. We might not like the answers - but we should not cast aspersions upon the institution and its values.

Good-bye to Train Travel?

I like travelling by train. I think I always have. My father worked for CNR and therefore train travel for my family was free. Until I was eleven and we got a car, the train was our only way of travelling long distances. I can remember when I was about six, being on a train, going from Montreal to a lake in the Laurentians and as we went around a curve - looking out seeing the engine pulling the train, belching smoke. I remember my family getting on the train to go to Old Orchard in Maine  for our week's holiday. I can remember the numerous trips I took as a university student from Montreal to New Brunswick. I think they put on a few older cars just for all of the students who went from Montreal to one of the Maritime universities. It always felt as if they put us in the cars, closed the doors and ignored us for the next day or so. It was wonderful! My affection for trains started early and in spite of the countless hours I have spent sitting on a stopped train waiting for a freight train to pass, the uncomfortable, sometimes all-too-well worn seats, the lack of decent food for non-meat eaters and the train being consistently late,  I still like trains. But I am not taking the train this year.

For the past few years it has been my practice to, just after Christmas, take the train from Sudbury to Vancouver . It is never an exciting journey. Quite frankly much of the Northern landscape covered as it is by ice and snow is not that inspiring. At the few places that the train stops at for any length of time, it is frequently too cold or too boring to get out. But travelling by train is a wonderful chance to relax, to listen to music, to read, to sleep and to chat to one's fellow travellers. There is a special feeling one gets travelling across the country with a handful of people, a sense that we are all in this together and that we are glad of it. Yes, we all groan about how often the train is forced into a siding while we wait, sometimes for up to an hour, while a freight train passes us by; we all quietly moan when some bored child and frustrated parent publically exhibit their respective manipulating  and parenting skills and we all expel a collective sigh of thankfulness as the train pulls into the Vancouver train station but I look forward to the experience every year. It is my private time where there are no phones, where there are no expectations of me, when I do not have to do anything.

This year however, I am not travelling from Sudbury to Vancouver by train because it is too expensive. I went on-line yesterday to buy my ticket - two months in advance - and found out  that a ticket to Vancouver, for a senior, in the economy class was  $934.00! I called an agent, he confirmed that that was the price. I called back, spoke to someone else who confirmed the price and suggested that the train was almost full and that is why the ticket was about over $400 more expensive than last year. I told both of the Via employees about my disappointment and outrage of such a high price (the cost of a ticket on the same train three days later was only $426). While the second agent acted more empathetic than the first, there was little they could do.

Train travel as always been slower than both air travel and Greyhound bus, it is now more expensive than either of those options. While there are some advantages to train travel, there are some real disadvantages including being confined to a box on wheels for up to 24 hours at a time and sitting on seats that while there is a lot more leg room than buses or planes, are just as hard and uncomfortable after a few hours.  To be asked to pay just under a $1,000 for this privilege seems more than outrageous. One would either have to be really afraid of flying or else getting off at some remote place that is not serviced by planes or buses. At best it is price gouging, at worst it is taking advantage of people who do not have a choice.

Via Rail is suppose to be a national train service. Every time I use it I have to wonder if it is a service managed by people whose real mandate is to destroy it.

MIssing Indigenous Women

In the last few weeks there have been a number of stories about events and processes surrounding the National Inquiry into Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls (MMIWG) ( see CBC). On the surface it does seem as if the inquiry has faced organizational issues as well as a number of resignations from key staff. In fact, almost from the start there have been complaints about the process, how slow it was in getting started, the lack of public consultation as to what the actual process would be and how the commission was not asking the families what they wanted. Every month or two it feels as if there more stories of how disappointed the families are. Equally as often there have been stronger and stronger suggestions that the Commission needs to start over again with at least a new chairperson. I am truly sorry that so many families are disappointed in the process. It must be so difficult to be told, to believe, that finally there will be answers as to why and how  a daughter, a sister, an aunt or a mother disappeared or was killed, and then for there be no answers to these questions. It must be disheartening beyond understanding to have ones' hopes raised and then to feel as if those hopes have once more be left hanging because not enough people care.

The inquiry however, was doomed to fail before it started. It was conceived as a process to respond to the concerns and the angst of hundreds of families who had lost their loved ones and who felt as if there were never satisfactory answers to why or how. It was established because politically the government felt as if it needed to be seen to doing something. Unfortunately if it is to do its job well, it will take decades of meetings and conversations. And at the end of it, I fear that nothing will be resolved or solved. The mandate is just too broad. The issues it is required to deal with are too complex and in many case too unrelated to each other to form any sort of constructive conclusion. It is a complete waste of time because many people already know what the problems are and in most case, we know what the solutions are. It is time we started to address them.

The evidence is clear. There has been a clear systemic bias within the criminal justice system to take the disappearance of indigenous women less seriously than they needed to. Such case have been ignored and/or dismissed on a consistent basis.  It is also clear that if the reports from Thunder Bay are accurate, police forces continue to treat such cases as, at best, unimportant. Police forces must ensure that the stereotypes and excuses of the past are no longer part of the thinking for the future. That change, within itself, would not reduce the number of murder or missing indigenous women, but it would ensure that families would at least be treated as all other families are treated. Equally as important, the criminal justice system must ensure that those who commit these acts of violence against indigenous women receive consequences that are appropriate and consistent with those received by those perpetrators involved with non-indigenous women.  Anything less than that is not justice.

There are also extraordinarily complex issues that need to be resolved within some First Nation Communities. The deaths of a significant number of Indigenous  women has been caused by Indigenous men. The destruction of culture because of residential schools and the consequences of the Indian Act has impacted some communities' capacity to parent and to be part of healthy adult relationships and lifestyles. Clearly more support needs to be provided to these communities that are struggling. Equally as clearly, these communities need to take responsibility in providing leadership to ensure that men have alternatives to hurting those close to them.  

Finally, the fact that men hurt women is not a new story. The fact that some men find it easier to prey upon Indigenous women is frightening and disturbing. While there is no doubt that such acts may have some racist overtones, the more important issue is finding ways to stop men from preying upon all women.  This is a national issue for all Canadians.

I accept that it is therapeutic for some people to share their stories; I understand that for some people it is critical for their emotional health to express their sadness and frustration over both the death of a love one and not knowing what happened or where the body is. I remain unconvinced that this therapeutic process is the responsibility of the Canadian government. Making sure that our systems work for all Canadians is the government's responsibility. They know what the problems are - I would prefer if our tax money went to making sure everyone had  equal access. If we need a commission to look at how policing needs to be improved for Indigenous peoples - great.  I am sure there are some very competent people within the communities across Canada and even within police forces who could create a platform for change.

We can spend our money on talking about how badly we have done things in the past ( and we have) or we can spend our money on making sure we don't make those mistakes again. I am not sure if we have the will to do both.

Thanksgiving 2017

It is Thanksgiving.....  a non-event for me in that I will be eating an ordinary meal at the usual time - alone. I was feeling rather sorry for myself, having been inundated with various advertisements and posts on Facebook - about how wonderful this day is, of being constantly reminded in food stores and at the Farmers Market of what a special day it was going to be.   I was feeling as if I was missing out on something important - perhaps critical to my well-being.  I do not like feeling sad.  I suspect that for many people, Thanksgiving ranks right up there with Christmas and Valentines as one of the most lonely days of the year. Those of us who live alone are made to feel as if there is something absent in our lives, that other people - in fact most people - are having an ever so much better time doing something else. There is a sense of inadequacies, of there being something wrong with you, of being so terribly alone.

Of course, it is all silliness. It is just another moment in time made special by commercial interests who seized upon the opportunity to make money. It is perfectly normal to be sad about missing family or friends - but not on a specific day - not because someone else tells you to be. It is great to spend time with family and friends - I love doing it - but if they are important people in our lives - we should see them often - not just on commercially define holidays; if we have reason to be thankful - then we need to give thanks every day.

When I look around, no matter how chaotic our lives sometimes may seem to us - we are so much more fortunate than others. On this day when Facebook book postings are littered with peoples' expressions of gratitude for our numerous blessings - it strikes me that those of us that are part of the elite (some education, access to the internet, some form of housing, access to food) need to give ourselves a swift kick in the butt for occasionally feeling as if we do not have all that we need, for occasionally feeling sad that we are missing something.  Notwithstanding the millions of people around the world who lack access to any of the above basic necessities, there are thousands of Canadians who are struggling: the parents who are doing their best to cope without a partner in raising their kids, the young people who have felt as if they had no choice but to leave their home far too early to maintain their sanity and/or their physical safety,or  the older Canadians who see no promise in the future in dealing with their diminishing physical/mental capacities.

When I think about the millions of dollars that have been spent on celebrating this day - the extra food and booze and the advertisements to sell them, and how much was spent in travelling to see family and friends - I can't help but wonder if we would not have all been better off in spending that money helping our neighbours have a better day or week or month. May be I am just envious about those who did celebrate this day with family and friends - but part of me wonders if rather than having a "thanksgiving " day, we would be all better if we had a "giving" day instead.

To honour this day - I donated some money to the Canadian Red Cross and to Doctors Without Borders.

Las Vegas - How Many More Times?

It is hard to know what to think or say about the most recent random shooting/slaughter of people in the USA. One can make all of the usual sounds of sadness or empathy that are spouted out at these kinds of times; one can express the shock of hearing the news and the frustration that these events seems to happen without a rational (if the words random shooting and rational can be used in the same paragraph) reason or explanation. But these events happen with such frequency that the words have lost their value. How many times can you say you are sorry that some stranger was killed before one becomes numb to the events, the horror? How many time can you utter those platitudes before one is just saying words that no one, for good reason, is listening to?

The pundits roll out their all-too-well worn phrases that argue that we need to do more to stop these random types of killing but any suggestion that they make has been made both made and ignored before. Politicians will wring their hands, ask their God for blessings and support in these trying times, and then not use what few god-given brains they have to start to address the underlying problems. Only the most naive person would ever assume that any of these words would have any effect; even the least cynical among us will assume that it will happen again and again and again.

There will be, of course, a debate about  gun control. The anti- gun lobby will demand tighter controls on who buys guns, and what type of guns can be owned by citizens; the pro-gun lobby will argue that guns don't kill people - people do . The same lobby will argue that as criminals, who are by definition people who don't follow the laws - will ignore the laws and that therefore the best protection is for everyone to have a gun. At the end of this debate, if citizens of the USA are lucky nothing will have changed - if they are unlucky the laws will have changed - making it even easier to buy and carry a gun.

I understand that some of my neighbours to the south are committed to their belief that their constitution guarantees them the absolute right to own as many guns as they wish to. I do not understand that need - but I accept it as their reality. I am quite sure that the vast majority of gun owners in the USA - including those who own a large number of guns - are concerned and alarmed at the number of people who are being killed by solo gunmen acting out their own personal fantasies or nightmares. I am equally as sure that many of those gun owners deeply believe that they are not part of the problem. And for the most part they are not...except for the fact that they refuse to allow their communities, including their politicians, to have the debate as to how to resolve this ongoing issue of citizens killing other citizens for no apparent reason.

As long as the debate is framed by the issue of what is or is not guaranteed by the constitution, and that such rights can never be taken away -it will be impossible to talk about insuring that people who do not need guns, people who are struggling with mental health issues, people who are bound and determined to force their values on to others and people who are afraid of change do not have access to guns. The debate should not be framed as one where some people want to take away rights from some other people (although lord knows the USA does that fairly constantly), but rather ensuring that people are safe from those who do not have the capacity to act in a safe and rational fashion.

Owning a gun in the USA may be a constitutional right - but surely along with all rights comes the moral and legal obligation to not hurt other people. Gun owners need to get over their paranoia of being picked on by a few liberal democrats and start to worry about the safety of themselves and their children.  If they joined the debate - they might be surprised to find out that most in the anti-gun lobby could not care less about how many hunting guns their neighbour had - as long as they were locked up safely, but rather they just want to be sure that their neighbour does have weapons whose only function is to kill as many people in the shortest time possible or that that same neighbour harboured a deadly grudge against society.

That, at least to me, seems a reasonable