What Justice?

The truck driver who plead guilty to causing the horrendous accident involving the Humboldt hockey team was given a sentence of eight years. On top of that, it is highly likely that he will be deported when his sentence is over. No sentence that he could have received that would have brought back any of the young men killed or for that matter allow some closure to occur for the families Eight years, therefore, seems reasonable - especially as it was an accident and he had not intentionally done anything to cause the accident (e.g. drinking alcohol). I would think the consequence of not being allowed to live in Canada would, for many people, seem like a very harsh sentence.

On the other hand, his boss who did nothing to ensure that his driver followed the law, that he was properly trained or prepared for the job was only fined $5,000.00. In fact, the owner of the trucking company systematically broke the laws - the very ones designed to monitor how long truckers drive and how much rest they get. It would seem to me that while clearly, the driver has responsibility for losing concentration and not being fully aware of his surroundings - surely the owner must bear some of the responsibility as well.

It is not clear to me why all of the responsibility lies on the shoulders of the truckers - especially truckers who at best have received the minimum amount of training and who may lack sufficient language skills to even ask other truckers for advice. It would seem to me that it is the boss who took advantage of the trucker, who used him and now gets off with a minimal slap on the wrist.

As I have stated elsewhere, the judge when choosing the appropriate sentence for any crime must consider a number of things, one of which is - will the sentence act as a deterrent, a warning to others to not make the same mistake? In many cases, I think it is foolish to assume that a criminal will consider how serious the consequence are before they commit a crime. In this case, however, if the fine had been substantial then perhaps other owners of small trucking companies would think twice before not following the rules.

As it is - owners can continue to flaunt the law and pay the minimal penalty. As so often the bosses get off easy and the worker pays the price.

Privilege

I am part of the elite. I am tall, male and white. That privilege was further enhanced because I grew up in Quebec in the 50s and 60s and spoke English. I never felt as if I was part of the elite. My family were at best working class, with constant reminders of how poor our parents had been as children and even more frequently, reminders of how close we were to still being very poor. We did not have a car until the summer I turned 12, I always seemed to be wearing pants that were too short for me but we could afford to buy new ones and while there was always lots of food to eat, my mother frequently reminded us about how difficult it was to make ends meet. I went to a poor school with at least some of the teachers being completely unqualified to teach. A school that had almost no library and the one lab did double duty as both a biology and a chemistry lab. The school system streamed the students into very specific program areas including assuming that 25% of the students would leave school by grade ten. The concept of providing anything stimulating outside of the classroom was a concept foreign to my parents, my teachers and the community as a whole. There were people better off than my family. We all knew who they were. I did not hang around with them.

If someone had asked me in 1966 if I was privileged - I would have answered no. Privilege then would have meant really rich people living in Westmount or the Town of Mount Royal or perhaps the queen. Certainly, it did not mean people like me who were raised believing they were poor, believing that opportunities were restricted.

I thought I was lucky. I caught the baby boomer wave and got into university (woefully unprepared and unable to get past my second year before I was asked to leave) and then had access to community college programs and then a number of community-based grants designed to hire all of the wandering around baby boomers. I built a career, had a family and did some interesting things. I am still doing interesting things and have within some limits - choices as to how I live my life. I now understand that those choices came to me because of privilege.

To be clear - I have worked my butt off. I have been cautious (frugal) about spending money, I have never taken a holiday where I flew to some resort. We lived in houses that were frequently substandard as we struggled to build or renovate houses and only once have I had a new car. There were times when I felt as if I had no choice but to continue to struggle. For month after month we didn't have enough money to pay our bills - certainly never enough to save anything. In hindsight, it feels as if there were years where I knew that we would never get ahead, that we would never be in full control of our lives or able to provide everything we wanted to our children. It never felt easy. It never felt as if I got something for free.

But in spite of that - we were privileged. I was working in a career of my choice, doing what I thought was important. If I occasionally felt stuck - it was a consequence of my choices. And almost always, there were other choices. There were even a few occasions when I quit a job because of a philosophical difference with my boss(es). The choices that seemed to just float my way happened in part because I worked hard, usually far more hours than I got paid for and I was good at what I did. But people noticed me, gave me the little bit extra room to shine, or to do something a little bit different - just because I said it might work - because I was tall, male and white. I earned every single dime I was paid, I worked hard to earn the trust of those who hired me but I was able to do get in the front door, to attract their attention because I was tall, male and white

There is no apology here. I never consciously used my sex, race or height to gain an advantage. But I need to acknowledge that it has been a presence in my life and that I have benefited from it. I also need to acknowledge it because only then can I realize how much more difficult it is for people who do not have such advantages and how much harder I need to work to ensure that the playing field is made level.

It is not that I got something I did not deserve or earn but rather other people without such privilege worked just as hard as I and still did not have the same opportunities. And that is wrong.

Really Children ..... Please Grow Up!

This week the Finance Minister of Canada presented the federal budget. The Opposition heckled, yelled and banged their desks so loudly for the entire speech that people could not hear what he was saying. The next day, the Conservatives presented 257 motions that they insisted be voted on. Because the 257 motions put forward by the Conservatives were all related to the budget and because all budget-related motions are seen as votes of confidence, if any one of those motions had been won by the Conservatives, the government would have fallen. Therefore all of the Liberal members needed to be there all of the time. It needs to be noted that because the Conservatives knew that they would lose on each motion - they had no need to ensure that all members were there for each vote. The sight of cots lining the halls of parliament so that members could take a nap would look bizarre if not such a sad commentary on our politicians.

I can understand that the federal Conservative smell fresh blood and want to make as much hay as possible while the sun is shining (sorry for the mix metaphors). I understand that for political parties such as the Conservatives and the NDP who both appear to lack any capacity for making some contributions to the running of the country, that the temptation to fixate on one topic where the government appears to be vulnerable may be almost overwhelming. I can understand that doing the hard work of looking for solutions to our problems is a lot less fun than heckling anyone who is speaking. But it is rude and far more importantly the Conservative strategy was counter-productive.

The House sat for 30 straight hours. Listening to speeches and then voting on each motion. 30 hours to vote on motions that the Liberals were guaranteed to win seems like a colossal waste of time and energy. While it may be that there is something in the allegations about how the Prime Minister and his office deal with SNC-Lavalin matter, it is not the only issue facing Canada. If the Conservatives want to demonstrate that they could run a county perhaps they need to start showing some maturity.

As useless as I think most federal (or for that matter provincial) politicians are most of the time - engaging in silly actions just ensures that they do even less. In fact, committee meetings were cancelled the day after the Conservatives' gambit to attract attention because everyone was too tired. It is difficult to imagine that anyone would see the Conservatives in a positive light after watching them demonstrating with childish glee their silly faked irritation. What employee in any company would be allowed to show such disrespect for their bosses - the electorate?

If the Liberals get tired of all of this stuff - they could do what the former Prime Minister did and just prorogue Parliament. In the meantime - it would be nice if everyone could attempt to act in an adult fashion and at least pretend to treat each other with a modicum of respect. If not the six months between now and the next election are going to be a waste of time in terms of anybody doing anything in Ottawa.

What is the Worth of a Human

Just over a year ago two local residents were charged with failing to provide the necessities of life for their dog. Since then, the dog has died and has become a symbol for the need to have stricter laws dealing with animal cruelty. Concerned citizens have protested at the courthouse and elsewhere demanding serious consequences for the two individuals. While I have not read any of the comments on social media, according to officials some of the comments have been racist, calling for violence and physical retribution against the accused (1). Protesters are demanding the maximum penalty which could be up to five years in prison(2).

I don't understand people who have an animal and then do not take care of it. In the above case, it was more than just a little bit of neglect - the animal had been seriously hurt, probably by its owner and then willfully ignored. It died a horrible death. I understand why people are concerned. I agree that people need to face consequences for their behaviour. BUT.......

It would seem to me that we need to keep perspective on what is important and where we need to spend our resources. On Vancouver Island, there are a host of issues that would benefit from more active public involvement. There is a lack of emergency shelters for people who are homeless, there are residents in the Valley who do not have access to enough food, there is, like almost everywhere else in Canada, far too many people dying because of a drug overdose - the list of things that need fixing is almost endless. All too frequently the only people who speak out about these issues are the ones saying - "don't let that those kinds of people into my neighbourhood". Outside of a small handful of people, no one is particularly concerned about what happens to folks who are struggling. There are not regular rallies demanding that something is done to ensure food security for all or that there be sufficient shelter for those who have been abused.

No one should ever suggest that the dog's painful existence and eventual death should go unremarked or unpunished, but if there are limited human resources to effect change - where should we spend those resources?

At the same time, Cyclone Idai has swept through Southern Africa killing perhaps hundreds of people. Plan International (3) has suggested that there may be thousands of children at risk. Countries such as Mozambique lack almost any of the resources required to help its citizens. While various world health organizations will ask for and receive millions of dollars from concerned citizens, no one will insist that policies that encourage global warming or that allow for the destruction of forests or the mining of fragile environments to get rare minerals that power our cell phones should be changed. And certainly, no one will demand that those who perpetrate these destructive acts (or benefit from them) be punished.

It is difficult to compare the two tragedies - one dog horrendously abused and then dying versus hundreds if not thousands of people dying. It is easier and more rewarding to express outrage at an identifiable face than it is to demand that the world's priorities change. I suspect that some of the local protesters are protesting because it feels as if they can have some influence on something, that their presence will perhaps have some sort of impact on the outcome of the trial. In a world where things seem to be shaped by inaccessible politicians and the executives of multi-national corporations, people need to feel as if they can control something, anything.

We all need to feel as if we have some control over our lives - how we achieve that sense of control may be critical to the survival of our species.


(1) https://vancouverisland.ctvnews.ca/defence-lawyer-out-in-duncan-animal-abuse-trial-1.4337744
(2) https://vancouverisland.ctvnews.ca/rally-held-in-duncan-to-condemn-acts-of-racism-amid-dog-abuse-trial-1.4334235
(3) https://www.cnn.com/2019/03/19/africa/cyclone-idai-mozambique-zimbabwe-intl/index.html

How Dumb Can they Be?

It appears, according to CBC and other media outlets, that during the 2017 campaign to elect a leader for the newly formed Albertan United Conservative Party, that there was some collusion amongst some of the candidates to ensure that Brian Jean lost to Jason Kenny. Quite simply the Kenny campaign team provided another candidate, Jeff Callaway, with resources that included " strategic political direction, media and debate talking points, speeches, videos, and attack advertisements" (1) all of which were designed to reduce votes for Brian Jean. Callaway had every intention of dropping out and indorsing Kenny. The RCMP have been asked by the office of Alberta's election commissioner to investigate further.

I, of course, am not an Albertan. Even if I was, who got elected to lead a provincial conservative party is perhaps none of my business, But I think how someone gets elected is everyone's business. If I had lived in Alberta and had participated in that leadership race by supporting Jeff Callaway, I would be bloody pissed off that he had not been serious about leading but rather only about ruining someone else's chance to lead. Whether or not it was illegal will debated by lawyers and pundits for some time. It is clear to me, however, that regardless of what is allowed by the United Conservative Party - that Kenny or at least his team's actions were just on the other side of being morally wrong. It was a gross manipulation of the public's perception done so that the crown prince of Canadian conservatives could be welcomed back to the Albertan political arena.

There is another issue that concerns me almost as much. That is - how stupid or arrogant are those who work in the backrooms of political parties? It seems to me that workers from the entire political spectrum send too many emails. Within those electronic exchanges, they share all kinds of information that while it may have seemed to be pertinent at the moment, and it may have been expedient to communicate via email - they have to know that someone, at some time, might examine their correspondence. They must realize - unless they are so arrogant to assume that they have the unfettered right to do whatever they want - that someone might see what they were doing was, at the very least, a little bit shady.

There may have been a time when people accepted that within the old boys club there were some strange bed partners. Partners who exchanged favours so that they could lead the assumed blind and ignorant public in whatever direction they (the politicians) wanted them to go. While that sort of thing clearly still happens, the public is hopefully less blind than it use to be. It is so much easier to find a record of potential wrongdoing. Part of me is quite delighted that they seem to be so full of themselves that they never think about the possibilities of having their emails flitting around the ether being read by unwelcome eyes- it makes it so much easier to watch them. It concerns me, however, because if those workers are the people who are doing the backroom manipulations and in fact creating the political environment and agenda are so unaware of how things work - how bright can they be? I think we need to have smarter people involved.

Side Point: the cynic in me wonders if it is an accident that this potentially damaging information about Jason Kenny is made public just months before the Alberta provincial election.

(1) https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmonton/kenney-callaway-campaigns-collaborated-against-brian-jean-1.5059899

How Some People's Kids Get into University

Our hearts are all a' flutter and our ire has been raised by the revelation that a number of people, mainly in the USA, have been charged with either bribing or lying to get their kids into a university of their choice or else facilitating/receiving those bribes or lies. Not surprisingly, the amount of money paid seems to be substantial. Perhaps even less surprising is that the lies and bribes were not all that sophisticated or even clever. What is surprising is the fact that some people are shocked that rich people, people who are part of the elite, people who generally see themselves as not needing to follow the same rules as the rest of us - have done these things.

Surely it cannot be a surprise to anyone that the wealthy for well over a century have seen universities as the rightful place for their offspring to find their way into adulthood and hopefully maturity. While private universities such as Harvard or Yale were originally founded to provide education to ministers (Christian), they have long been a place where the elite go to meet others like themselves and to establish networks that will smooth their future paths. And there is nothing wrong with that. We would like to believe that universities are a place where young people go to have their minds expanded, the reality, however, is that that does not happen for the majority of students. Most of us, most of the time, end up hanging around with people who are like us, who have similar values and interests. University students whether they are attending a 150-year-old institution in the US or a British one that is 800 years old are no different than the rest of the population. We all spend our time with people with whom we are comfortable.

By lying or at least allowing lies to be told about their offspring or by bribing/buying a university spot, not only have those parents broken the law but they have also damaged the reputations of the institutions and I would hope, offended their peers who did not bend the rules. However, I would guess that as donating money to a university and then a child being accepted to that university is not an unusual event. It might cause some personal embarrassment but no one will really care. Such fraud is so common that a popular, long-running television show (Suits) has as a lead character, an individual who earned his living by taking university entrance tests for other people.

This most recent example of the elite paying to get additional, unearned privileges is just a reminder to the rest of us of how those elite maintain their status and their power within a society. It is a dangerous practice because every time someone uses their money or their status to purchase a place in a university class - it means that someone else, someone whose parents do not have access to hundreds of thousands of dollars to purchase entrance into a university does not get in. Every time that happens, those that feel dispossessed, disenfranchised and isolated from the opportunities supposedly available to us all - are provided with another reason why there is no point in trying, that there is no reason to even pretend that they have a chance to succeed.

People giving up hope is never good for society.

Controlling Research and its Findings

One of the cornerstones behind our belief in science is that the research is independent - free from any taint of manipulation by those companies or individuals who have a vested interest in the results. We also assume that when the findings are published - they are presented in recognized journals after having been reviewed by competent, non-involved peers. While far less discussed, I think that the majority of Canadians make the assumption that the research is available to the public.

Unfortunately, very little of the above appears to be always true. Most people are aware of how flawed the research was on smoking and cancer. We are all aware that doctors and other scientist were paid, by tobacco companies, to say things that they knew not to be true. Certainly, the more current debate on what to believe in terms of climate change has been fraught with competing information, some of it provided by coal and oil companies. But somehow we have hung on to the belief that most of the time we can trust most of the information that scientists produce. It may be less true than ever before.

Two stories have been quietly circulating somewhere off of the front page of major media outlets that suggest that we may need to re-visit how we see scientific research. The first story is that when Health Canada was determining as to whether or not the use of Monsanto's Roundup would be allowed, they reviewed numerous pieces of research. Some of those reports were, at the very least, indirectly paid for and edited by Monsanto. Which in itself does not prove that the findings that glyphosate was not dangerous were wrong, but given the millions of dollars involved - it should make one suspicious as to how neutral were some of the researchers.

It would perhaps make things more transparent if anyone could access the information and perhaps even more importantly who funded the research. I might not be able to understand complicated try. The second story that I suspect that has drifted well under the radar of most Canadians is the fact that access to academic research, research that is frequently wholly or partially funded through the Canadian taxpayer is not available to most Canadians. In fact, accessing it may be becoming too expensive for some universities.

The present system is that all research that is published by recognized journals is only available if an university purchases on an annual basis a licence from the publishing company. Canadian universities paid out over $300 million last year for the right to have professors and students have access to a variety of academic journals. The journals are published online, the papers are written and reviewed at no cost to the publishers. The general public can purchase a subscription but the cost can be up to $3,000-$5,000 for a single year. They can also purchase a single article. Again the costs can be prohibitive if one is just curious.

So - we can't be sure whether or not the research that is presented to government agencies is valid, free from inappropriate influence and we do not have easy, affordable access to the same research that the government has to make the decisions for ourselves. The only access we have to information is what the companies or their shills give us or else the information from organizations who are perhaps equally as biased from another perspective.

It is not surprising that so many of us do not have a clue as to who to believe anymore. We are prevented from collect the information to make our own decisions.