MLA Speaks in New Sarepta

My little village isn't famous... yet. But we aim to make New Sarepta a center of public debate and open dialogue.

New Sarepta is found just 20 miles east of Leduc, and only a 30-minute drive from the southeast corner of Edmonton. It was once a thriving community with grain elevators, farm equipment dealerships, several stores and a couple of gas stations. Yet as the area around Edmonton has exploded with growth, New Sarepta has suffered because of the costs of keeping up with what larger centers have to offer.

New Sarepta has the potential to be a thriving rural community again. It's close to the city and virtually next door to the International Airport. Yet the question arises, how do communities like ours respond to the demands of modern society in a way that ensures we remain vibrant communities that attract new residents and sustainable development.

The Friends of the Library in New Sarepta has invited Battle River-Wainwright MLA Doug Griffiths to present "13 Ways to Kill Your Community" in the New Sarepta Agriplex on Tuesday, May 4th. Although titled with tongue-in-cheek, Doug Griffith's presentation addresses the issues surrounding the withering of Alberta's rural communities and is a must-attend event for anyone interested in the future of rural Alberta.

Doug Griffiths is one of the province's most gifted speakers and is concerned about the sustainability of Alberta's rural communities. Mr. Griffiths has become famous for his use of social media, often twittering and facebooking from inside caucus meetings.

Doug will be in the New Sarepta Agriplex on Tuesday, May 4th from 6:45 to give is noted presentation to area residents and local politicians. Everyone with interest in rural municipal affairs and the general direction of rural life in this province is welcome.

There will be no charge for attendance (though donations will be gratefully accepted). Beer and wine will be available as well as coffee, tea and light snacks.

Support our little local village and help build New Sarepta a place where ideas are discussed and debated openly and enthusiastically.

For more information, call me (Will) at 780-297-3811.

See you there.

Am I a Progressive?

I did the inconceivable this weekend and took two days off to attend the REBOOT 2.0 conference at the Delta Kananaskis. Me taking time off work except for being too sick to get out of bed or because of a family emergency is rarer than the USA beating Canada in an Olympic gold medal game. Yet, I drove 400 km to a very plush hotel and attended a conference of self-described "progressives" to consider what that label actually means... and if it does mean anything, what sort of agenda can we collectively pursue to make Alberta a more "progressive" province.

Reflecting on my own perceptions, I've always felt myself to be a small 'l' liberal... yet for reasons of convenience, I've always labelled myself a small 'c' conservative... not that labels matter that much. Still, I always plopped myself in the Red Tory category when labels were needed. It's just easier... and until the Ralph Klein, Stephen Harper and Ed Stelmach eras, I had no real feelings of conflict between the way I felt and what I called myself.

This weekend I found myself among more than 100 people who it might be said share a similar set of values with me. For the most part I wasn't surprised by much of what anyone said, or the directions of the conversations I was involved in. It seems all of us want a more inclusive society with more social justice and an insurance that the most vulnerable in society will not suffer. We accept that modern problems require complex solutions and that decisions made by government need to be made based on research and evidence rather than on specific ideologies.

This was a room full of articulate, intelligent folks who (for the most part) had no trouble with communication. This was a group who I quite closely identified with when we talked about values and policies we would like to see. The vision that most people in the room had for the future of the province was much closer to my own than the one I see the province now pursuing.

Yet I can't say I was entirely comfortable at the conference. While the group espoused values that I think could be sold to 80% of Albertans because the basis of those values is one that most caring people share. Still, I couldn't help feel that if some of the folks who spoke up at the conference lived and worked in my everyday world... if they had to engage the same down-to-earth neighbours and colleagues that I meet every day, there would be friction.

I'm not all together why I felt it... but I did. I think there were simply too many four-syllable words and phrases like, "social dichotomy," and "parallel planes of reference" that wouldn't wash in my world. I wasn't even sure at times what the hell some people meant.

We all recognise that we want more time with our families and our neighbours. We all want to feel secure that as we grow old, we will not be abandoned. We all seek justice. We all want integrity from our elected officials. I have no doubt that the values of the people I met with this weekend are the same values as the people I meet at the arena... the guys and gals I work with and the majority of the rest of the people I meet on a daily basis in rural Alberta.

Yet I'm nagged by a feeling that if some of the people who were acting as spokespersons used the same way of talking out here in the country, the ideas we all share wouldn't even get a hearing. There would be no listening because of the patterns of speech and words employed.

This is not to say that I did not meet a handful of people I want to stay in touch with. Some of those I spoke to moved me greatly with their stories and their passion. There were people in that room who will be able to connect the values we shared this weekend with whoever they come into contact with. There were lots of them, actually. It's just that it wasn't everyone.

It was a profound realisation that while we share values... and a vision of a better province... there really is a difference in the way we talk in the city and the way we talk in the country.

It's all in the oxfords, I guess.

Last week on my way home from a particularly tough midnight shift, which lasted until 10:30, I stopped in at a Second Cup to wind down, have a strong cup of something hot and read the newspaper. It had been a freezing night. I was cold and tired but not quite ready for bed. I entered the coffee shop in my grubby winter work jacket, my boots and my unkempt toque-head and unshaven, red face. I may have looked a sight to some of the suburban folks sitting, but I took no notice. All I wanted was that hot cup of coffee and my copy of the Edmonton Journal.

I was about most of the way through the front section, reading the Op-Ed pages when a man in a nice suit came over and started thumbing through the other sections of my paper, which I had left on the chair beside me. I looked up a little startled, as if to ask what he was doing. He looked back and said, "I'm goining to take the Business Section; you're not going to read it!"

I thought I must have heard him wrong and asked, "What?"

"Well," he condescended, "you're not going to read the Business Section, are you?"

Ahhh, I thought, he doesn't think some bum in a work-style coat, wearing big safety boots and looking as dishevelled as I did that morning would have any interest in the financial pages of the paper.

"Oh, I get it," I nodded. "You don't think someone like me would read the Business Section. Is that it."

"Well," he stammered, "I just assumed...."

"You assumed that because I look like this, I'm too uneducated to be able to understand or care about economics." "Well, here's the deal," I continued, "you can have the business section while I'm finishing off the Front Section and the City Section. However, once I'm done, I will want the Business Section of the paper I BOUGHT."

"Oh, I'm sorry," he retreated. "I didn't mean to say that you couldn't understand economics." Then he put the paper down and walked away.

I didn't know whether to laugh or cry. I did like my mother told me and got a good education. I just happen to like working outside better and have chosen labour over the inside jobs I used to do.

The Last Refuge of Scoundrels

Last week I wrote a letter to my local member of parliament protesting the prorogation of our national parliament for the second time in just over a year. The first time to avoid a vote of confidence... the very first time in Canadian history that prorogation had ever been used to avoid the downfall of a government.

In the letter I asked Mr. Benoit (MP) five questions:

1. Was Parliament prorogued to halt the investigation into the torture of Afghan detainees? If not, will it be restarted when Parliament resumes?

2. If Peter MacKay did not receive the reports of torture, please explain the testimonies of Richard Colvin and General Walter Natynczyk in which they say that the reports were passed to the minister.

3. Prior to this government, Parliament has never been prorogued to avoid a confidence vote or to halt an investigation. If your party forms the next government, will you continue to suspend Parliament whenever you deem it necessary?

4. Many Canadians want the government to get back to work; will you continue to collect your salary while Parliament is prorogued?

5. Democracy is under threat in Canada, in no small part due to the actions of your party. Given the recent record of PM Harper, kindly explain how you intend to restore the confidence of Canadians that democracy still means "the will of the people."

I was pleased that Mr. Benoit responded (probably because I sent the letter to newspapers around the region and he felt compelled... he often does not respond to letters I send). Basically, his response was to obfuscate the issue of prorogation by explaining that it has been done 105 times before and there was nothing extraordinary about prorogation.

What he did not address was the calculated way both of these prorogations have avoided potentially negative outcomes for his government... by avoiding a vote of confidence and by postponing an investigation into the ethics of our Minister of Defense.

While I expected nothing less, the most offensive part of his response came when he accused "opposition" parties of criticising Canada's Armed Forces. To my knowledge, none of the opposition parties has criticised the courage or dedication of our fighting men and women. The criticism is directed at an elected member of parliament and the investigation is to get at the facts surrounding the ethics of the government... and not the men and women in Afghanistan.

Samuel Johnson said it best in 1775: "Patriotism is the last refuge scoundrels."

Canadians should be getting very concerned with a government that suspends parliament to avoid criticism and then targets those who use their right to freedom of expression as unpatriotic.

I Like Foreign Films

I stopped off at the video rental place on my way home from work the other day. It’d been a long, cold, physically challenging day, and I wanted nothing more than to plunk myself in front of the tube to watch a movie.

I was browsing through the Foreign Films section, I came across The Trailor Park Boys, Jesus of Montreal… and The Apprenticeship of Duddy Kravitz. Sitting alongside films from all around the world were Canadian films made in Canada with Canadian directors and Canadian actors.

The young girl who worked there was just walking past. Picking up a copy of Atanariuat, I asked her, “why is this in the Foreign Films section?” Poor thing looked at the title and then up at me with a face that seemed to say “you idiot” and chided coldly, “we put all the movies made in other countries here.” Then she shook her head and stomped away.

I realised that I could have made my point a whole lot better with the video store girl had I held up The Trailor Park Boys, but that’s fodder for another column.

It took Canada a long time to gain sovereignty over this amazing land and to be viewed as a nation in our own right, not one beholding to some parent across the sea. This country’s very magic is that we are made of races of people who have each brought something special to create a unique nation in our own right.

Yet today, Canadian icons are no longer Canadian. Air Canada, CN Rail, Molsons, Labatts, The Hudson Bay Company, Dofasco, Alcan, Stelco, Canadian Pacific Hotels and Eatons… and a list much longer than I care to continue with. Many of these have been sold to American interests and run in a very un-Canadian way, where employees and communities come somewhere after the bottom line.

Canada’s own sovereignty is now compromised by this International/Americanisation of our resources and labour force. Our governments can no longer protect citizens from the whims of corporate board members who may never have set foot in a Canadian community, and who have no love for our history or uniqueness. Some governments even aid and abet the process of selling off our Canadian-ness for the sake of profit (I won’t name any, Mr. Harper and Mr. Stelmach, because I’m Canadian and don’t want to offend anyone).

We have given up our right to set our own course in this world. We’ve again become subservient to larger forces. It didn’t have to be this way. Smaller countries like New Zealand, Denmark, Norway and Finland have stayed in control of their own policies regardless of living near much larger and powerful nations and proven they can maintain their special place in the world community.

There may still be hope that we can get return to being truly and independently Canadian some day. Latvia, Estonia and Lithuania fought out from under the yoke of one of the most repressive regimes in human history to reclaim their status as independent states and are now rebuilding their own uniqueness. There is enough spirit left in ordinary Canadians to rouse into action. Canada is worth protecting from this slide into sameness being slowly and quietly being foisted on us.

One sign I’ll be looking for is a much larger Foreign Film section at Blockbuster… one expanded to fit the thousands of movies from Hollywood that really belong there. Of course, then I’d have to admit The Trailor Park Boys are ours.

It Isn't True if they Say it Isn't

As many as 40% of Canadians believe global warming is a hoax. That’s probably higher in Alberta. Talk shows hammer our airwaves day after day with ranting hosts... bringing up the recent "Climate-gate" scandal as evidence that more than 100 years of climate data is somehow fraudulent.

The lack of scientific transparency certainly raises ethical issues within the scientific community. However, the assertion that it proves a hoax is manipulative and ridiculous.

The simple fact is that science has measured surface and ocean temperatures... ocean currents... desertification... clouds... atmospheric pollution... the deterioration of the world's glaciers... the shrinking northern ice cap... the destablisation of the southern ice cap... the shrinking of the Greenland ice mass and countless other climate changes for more than a century. There is no other explanation for these massive shifts. They correlate directly with rising CO2 levels since the beginning of the fossil fuel age from 250 parts per billion (ppb) to 380 in the last 150 years. Yet climate-change deniers want us to believe these changes—and the rapid increase in average yearly temperatures (this decade is the hottest in recorded history, despite deniers’ fraudulent claims)—is all a matter of sunspots.

Every high student knows CO2 traps heat. It’s a simple laboratory experiment. In the last four decades alone, mankind has pumped hundreds of trillions of tons of CO2 into the atmosphere. Earth is a closed system. That CO2 has nowhere to go and once in the atmosphere it traps heat for a very long time. For climate deniers to claim differently, they would have to come up with some radical theory to explain the changes. They have never done that because there is no other theory.

Their goal is simple; they want to sow doubt in those who do not have time to understand the science, or who are simply hoping against all rational hope that this disaster is not really looming at all, and that we can continue to pollute the planet with no negative consequences.

Much of climate change denial rhetoric comes from something called the Heartland Institute (not coincidentally funded by Exxon) and climate scientist Dr Patrick Michaels (lavishly paid by the coal lobby). Their job is not to disprove human-induced climate change; it is simply to plant doubt in voters and decision makers and delay forced changes through the democratic process.

These people are not stupid or greedy… or are they? Would they jeopardize our own planet? Is greed that strong? Would some people profit at the expense of others? We all know the answer to that.

The greenhouse effect is undisputed science… even by deniers. We continue to pump trillions tons of greenhouse gases into the air every year. CO2 levels in the atmosphere have increased by more than 50%.

Those are the facts. Logic dictates that there is a correlation between climate change and greenhouse gas. It may be easier to believe global warming is a sham. I wish it were.

You may never read this column again. Fine. Just don’t ignore the disappearing lakes and forests of this province, or the rapidly shrinking glaciers that fill our rivers every summer. And when you notice, ask yourself, “shouldn’t someone come up with a theory to explain all this?”

We already have. It was just easier to pretend it wasn’t happening.

No Danger to the Public

Yesterday, while I was resting in the bunkhouse in Biggar, Saskatchewan, a couple of hundred kilometers to the east, a CN crew had a little spot of trouble when their train hit a broken rail.

CN spokesmen say that although several cars of propane caught fire and were burning along with some cars filled with plastic, there is absolutely no danger to the public. Perhaps, what they mean is there is absolutely no danger to the public... as long as the public stays away from the accident... and by public, I don't suppose they mean the environment.

The derailment apparently occurred only three cars behind the engines. Luckily, the broken rail didn't do it's damage while the locomotives roared over it, otherwise there might have been engines on fire and a couple of roasted railroaders... but even then, the public probably wouldn't have been in any more danger.

My own train last night ran out of fuel 40 miles from the city and we had to wait two hours in the snow for a fuel truck to come and rescue us. A quintessentially Canadian day on the railroad.

Share