(Aired on October 12, 2010)
The rules regarding those found not criminally responsible for their crimes have to be changed. A man involved in a car crash in Vancouver last December has been released from detention, free to do whatever he wishes, after being found not criminally responsible for the crash. In that crash, the man carjacked a vehicle, then ran it into a building, causing injury to a girl inside the vehicle at the time. The Review Board says the man stopped taking his meds before the crash and was experiencing emotional distress. Somehow that's supposed to excuse his behavior?
The rules are simply wrong. While a man may not be criminally responsible, surely that doesn't mean he can get away with a serious offense. We have others in the same boat who committed murder and are also open to release when their next hearings come up. While we rely on these review boards to make judgments in these cases, one must question whether or not the rules are tough enough to ensure that people are detained for their behavior, no matter what causes it.
I understand it's one thing when you understand your actions and commit a crime, and another when you don't understand. But what's to stop this man from going off his medication again and committing another act? The review says this man is still a threat, and is under several conditions as part of his release. Do you honestly think he would understand those conditions if he again went off medication? That's absolutely stupid.
I don't want to preclude people from being freed when they're ready, but how can you say anyone can be ready under these circumstances? The laws are wrong, and it's time someone took the lead in doing something to make them stronger. Maybe these people aren't criminally responsible, but they're certainly responsible. And certainly they should get more than just a slap on the wrist and let back out into society.
Showing posts with label Doug. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Doug. Show all posts
Wednesday, October 13, 2010
Friday, October 8, 2010
Who's in Bigger Trouble: Campbell or James?
(Aired on October 7, 2010)
One of the things I love about politics is that just when you thought you've seen it all, something else pops up. Just when she thinks things are rolling along for her, and the NDP looks like it's on its way to beating up on Gordon Campbell, the party starts to self-destruct just like the Liberals did a few months ago.
Carole James has booted Cariboo-North MLA Bob Simpson out of the caucus and taken away his post as critic for aboriginal relations and reconciliation. Apparently Simpson attacked James' recent speech to the Union of B.C. Municipalities convention is some online comments. And now his constituency association is openly calling for a leadership race.
Just days ago, it looked more and more like we were going to have a new Liberal leader for James to fight in the next election. Speculation was that Gordon Campbell was going to step down and make way for a new leader who could resurrect the party after all the HST and health care controversy of the past year. But wait-maybe it will be Campbell who will stay and James will go.
James has not been as stellar a leader as many thought she might be when she took over the party reins, but it was generally assumed there was no real challenge to her leadership, and she might well have a chance to become the Premier in 2013. Who knows what might happen now? Is Simpson's revolt the tip of the iceberg? Politics is a crazy game. You just never know where the next bit of juicy news will come from. I'm sure James and Premier Campbell are both going to be watching their back as much as they watch the road ahead over the next few months. Perhaps Campbell is about to rise from the ashes like the Phoenix and maybe it will be James who crashes and burns. keep your eyes tuned for the next installment.
One of the things I love about politics is that just when you thought you've seen it all, something else pops up. Just when she thinks things are rolling along for her, and the NDP looks like it's on its way to beating up on Gordon Campbell, the party starts to self-destruct just like the Liberals did a few months ago.
Carole James has booted Cariboo-North MLA Bob Simpson out of the caucus and taken away his post as critic for aboriginal relations and reconciliation. Apparently Simpson attacked James' recent speech to the Union of B.C. Municipalities convention is some online comments. And now his constituency association is openly calling for a leadership race.
Just days ago, it looked more and more like we were going to have a new Liberal leader for James to fight in the next election. Speculation was that Gordon Campbell was going to step down and make way for a new leader who could resurrect the party after all the HST and health care controversy of the past year. But wait-maybe it will be Campbell who will stay and James will go.
James has not been as stellar a leader as many thought she might be when she took over the party reins, but it was generally assumed there was no real challenge to her leadership, and she might well have a chance to become the Premier in 2013. Who knows what might happen now? Is Simpson's revolt the tip of the iceberg? Politics is a crazy game. You just never know where the next bit of juicy news will come from. I'm sure James and Premier Campbell are both going to be watching their back as much as they watch the road ahead over the next few months. Perhaps Campbell is about to rise from the ashes like the Phoenix and maybe it will be James who crashes and burns. keep your eyes tuned for the next installment.
Wednesday, October 6, 2010
Nisga'a Fight Clouds Credibility
(Aired on October 5, 2010)
Ten years after it was hailed as an historic deal that could pave the way for the settlement of native land claims, B.C. Supreme Court heard today from a Nisga'a hereditary chief that the landmark Nisga'a deal should be thrown out. James Robinson says the deal is unconstitutional. He says the treaty makes the Nisga'a a third order of government, something Canada's constitution doesn't allow.
Back when this agreement was negotiated, initiated and signed, it was called, ironically, the Nisga'a Final Agreement. It was supposed to end a conflict that had lasted over a hundred years. It was not liked by a number of other First Nations, but it was seen as a groundbreaking treaty that could form a pattern for the future. Now, it is in danger of collapse.
The sad part of the fight is that it casts a cloud on the credibility of treaty negotiations. If agreements are made, considered legally binding by the parties that made them, should they not then be relied upon for the future? First Nations with legitimate land claims, and there are many in our province, in my opinion will be hurt if this agreement is thrown out. And that would be a tragedy. I can see the critics now - how can we trust you to stay true to your word? Ten years down the road, how do we now some more militant band council won't try to have the deal quashed? What kind of guarantee do we have that if we make an agreement with you, that it won't be reversed down the road?
Of course, no one thinks of the other side of the coin, how First Nations have been deceived, coerced and manipulated over the decades. They only see it as black and white, with no grey. But reality is, if historic agreements like the Nisga'a deal can be overturned ten years after it was put to bed, where does that put land claims negotiations that are still ongoing. In my view, this case is a setback for both sides, and will only continue to delay negotiations to end the long fight for First Nations to get what is legitimately theirs.
Ten years after it was hailed as an historic deal that could pave the way for the settlement of native land claims, B.C. Supreme Court heard today from a Nisga'a hereditary chief that the landmark Nisga'a deal should be thrown out. James Robinson says the deal is unconstitutional. He says the treaty makes the Nisga'a a third order of government, something Canada's constitution doesn't allow.
Back when this agreement was negotiated, initiated and signed, it was called, ironically, the Nisga'a Final Agreement. It was supposed to end a conflict that had lasted over a hundred years. It was not liked by a number of other First Nations, but it was seen as a groundbreaking treaty that could form a pattern for the future. Now, it is in danger of collapse.
The sad part of the fight is that it casts a cloud on the credibility of treaty negotiations. If agreements are made, considered legally binding by the parties that made them, should they not then be relied upon for the future? First Nations with legitimate land claims, and there are many in our province, in my opinion will be hurt if this agreement is thrown out. And that would be a tragedy. I can see the critics now - how can we trust you to stay true to your word? Ten years down the road, how do we now some more militant band council won't try to have the deal quashed? What kind of guarantee do we have that if we make an agreement with you, that it won't be reversed down the road?
Of course, no one thinks of the other side of the coin, how First Nations have been deceived, coerced and manipulated over the decades. They only see it as black and white, with no grey. But reality is, if historic agreements like the Nisga'a deal can be overturned ten years after it was put to bed, where does that put land claims negotiations that are still ongoing. In my view, this case is a setback for both sides, and will only continue to delay negotiations to end the long fight for First Nations to get what is legitimately theirs.
Tuesday, October 5, 2010
Pickton Inquiry in Danger of Becoming Useless
(Aired on October 4, 2010)
I believe that the inquiry into the murders committed by and alleged against Robert Pickton is in danger of becoming totally useless. There is a suggestion that the inquiry, headed by former Attorney-General Wally Oppal, is going to focus on more than just the police investigation of the murders. Several people representing the victims' families, and various social agencies, suggest that focusing only on the police investigation will ignore the critical issue of why many of the victims are on the street, selling themselves in the sex trade, and getting wrapped up in the drug scene.
I'm against expanding the inquiry. And I'll tell you why. It has nothing to do with being unconcerned about the marginalization of people's lives and how to deal with some serious social issues. It's about taking a concern that has been expressed, the way the police investigation was handled, and turning it into some sort of gong show that will be so all-encompassing that it will provide very few real results. There were serious problems in the way enforcement agencies dealt with the investigation, lack of coordination between municipal forces and the RCMP, and even poor communication within various departments of the same force. That in itself is a major inquiry topic. Surely that will keep Mr. Oppal busy for a long time.
Certainly some believe that because these were largely sex trade workers who went missing, that they were blown off by police. That certainly is a topic for Oppal's inquiry. But to expand the inquiry into a full-fledged investigation of why these women are on the streets will be far too big an issue. We'll wind up with a million general recommendations, and few will really get the attention they deserve.
I'm not saying these issues shouldn't be investigated. But maybe by a separate inquiry, with a proper mandate to look at the reasons why these people get forced out on the streets and how we can deal with them. To wrap them up with an inquiry of how the police investigation went in the Pickton case is the wrong choice, and won't result in the justice these women so deserve.
I believe that the inquiry into the murders committed by and alleged against Robert Pickton is in danger of becoming totally useless. There is a suggestion that the inquiry, headed by former Attorney-General Wally Oppal, is going to focus on more than just the police investigation of the murders. Several people representing the victims' families, and various social agencies, suggest that focusing only on the police investigation will ignore the critical issue of why many of the victims are on the street, selling themselves in the sex trade, and getting wrapped up in the drug scene.
I'm against expanding the inquiry. And I'll tell you why. It has nothing to do with being unconcerned about the marginalization of people's lives and how to deal with some serious social issues. It's about taking a concern that has been expressed, the way the police investigation was handled, and turning it into some sort of gong show that will be so all-encompassing that it will provide very few real results. There were serious problems in the way enforcement agencies dealt with the investigation, lack of coordination between municipal forces and the RCMP, and even poor communication within various departments of the same force. That in itself is a major inquiry topic. Surely that will keep Mr. Oppal busy for a long time.
Certainly some believe that because these were largely sex trade workers who went missing, that they were blown off by police. That certainly is a topic for Oppal's inquiry. But to expand the inquiry into a full-fledged investigation of why these women are on the streets will be far too big an issue. We'll wind up with a million general recommendations, and few will really get the attention they deserve.
I'm not saying these issues shouldn't be investigated. But maybe by a separate inquiry, with a proper mandate to look at the reasons why these people get forced out on the streets and how we can deal with them. To wrap them up with an inquiry of how the police investigation went in the Pickton case is the wrong choice, and won't result in the justice these women so deserve.
Monday, October 4, 2010
Court Ruling Raises Gamut of Issues
(Aired on September 30, 2010)
Hot on the heels of a controversial ruling this week regarding prostitution laws in this country comes another case that is sure to raise all sorts of issues. The B.C. Supreme Court is being asked to determine whether it is unconstitutional to prevent children conceived with donor sperm from knowing the identities of their biological fathers. 28 year old Olivia Pratter is a journalist. She launched the case after fighting for a decade for records related to her conception. She says the system needs to be changed.
One of the biggest concerns is the issue of denying children access to essential medical records. That, to me, is a very legitimate concern. Many problems are hereditary. Being prone to certain types of diseases and other medical conditions goes from generation to generation. Sometimes they skip a generation. If a parent notices something in their child, for example, they might want to know if it may be something that future generations should be concerned about.
Adopted children face the same concern. For that reason alone, it is probably a good idea to have all the details. But does that somehow open the doors for some children to try to claim money from the donor for health costs, or getting a cut of the family fortune? That would be an entirely different scenario, but one which the Supreme Court needs to take into account. It's one thing to make a case for needing medical records, but if your turns out to be a billionaire, do you think you should have a piece of that pie?
The case is sure to draw a lot of interest. Adopted children, and I'm sure it extends to children of sperm donors, often go through psychological stress wondering about their real parents, even though their adopted parents may be the best parents on earth. I don't envy the Court's decision. There's a good case to be made in arguing it either way.
Hot on the heels of a controversial ruling this week regarding prostitution laws in this country comes another case that is sure to raise all sorts of issues. The B.C. Supreme Court is being asked to determine whether it is unconstitutional to prevent children conceived with donor sperm from knowing the identities of their biological fathers. 28 year old Olivia Pratter is a journalist. She launched the case after fighting for a decade for records related to her conception. She says the system needs to be changed.
One of the biggest concerns is the issue of denying children access to essential medical records. That, to me, is a very legitimate concern. Many problems are hereditary. Being prone to certain types of diseases and other medical conditions goes from generation to generation. Sometimes they skip a generation. If a parent notices something in their child, for example, they might want to know if it may be something that future generations should be concerned about.
Adopted children face the same concern. For that reason alone, it is probably a good idea to have all the details. But does that somehow open the doors for some children to try to claim money from the donor for health costs, or getting a cut of the family fortune? That would be an entirely different scenario, but one which the Supreme Court needs to take into account. It's one thing to make a case for needing medical records, but if your turns out to be a billionaire, do you think you should have a piece of that pie?
The case is sure to draw a lot of interest. Adopted children, and I'm sure it extends to children of sperm donors, often go through psychological stress wondering about their real parents, even though their adopted parents may be the best parents on earth. I don't envy the Court's decision. There's a good case to be made in arguing it either way.
Wednesday, September 29, 2010
10 Years After His Death, Trudeau's Legacy Lives On
(Aired on September 28, 2010)
There can be little argument that Pierre Elliott Trudeau was one of the greatest, most influential Prime Ministers who ever lived. Trudeau died ten years ago, and he's still as much talked about as any PM before or since. We have had great Prime Ministers since our founding, John A. MacDonald, Laurier, Mackenzie King, Pearson, but few have stirred the nation as Pierre Trudeau did. He was arrogant, flamboyant, and some thought of him as simply a jerk for the way he acted with his "fuddle duddle" comments and the way he seemed to look down at Canadians as if they were much lower in station than him. But assessing his career, at a time of political turmoil, separation at the boiling point, and the need to bring our country together, Pierre Trudeau was a master. And few can fault the way he did that.
I will personally never forget one of his most poignant moments, when the FLQ crisis was happening in 1970, and Trudeau introduced the War Measures Act to try and contain this group of terrorists. As a young 22-year old journalist, I watched with interest as CBC reporter Tim Ralfe asked the PM how far he would go to curb civil liberties to bring peace. Trudeau's reply "Well, just watch me." It was a defining moment in our history, and probably solidified Trudeau's support in Western Canada as a French Canadian Prime Minister who was prepared to do anything necessary to bring an end to the crisis.
I never was a big fan of many of the sections of Trudeau's Charter of Rights and Freedoms, but his concept of a "just society" was hard to oppose. He didn't handle the economy particularly well, and he was criticized roundly for his efforts to centralize power in the federal government over the interests of the provinces, particularly with respect to the oil wealth of the prairies. You may like him or not, but you can't deny that Pierre Trudeau was a leader like no other. His charisma may never be seen again in our country, and his legacy will be here for decades to come.
There can be little argument that Pierre Elliott Trudeau was one of the greatest, most influential Prime Ministers who ever lived. Trudeau died ten years ago, and he's still as much talked about as any PM before or since. We have had great Prime Ministers since our founding, John A. MacDonald, Laurier, Mackenzie King, Pearson, but few have stirred the nation as Pierre Trudeau did. He was arrogant, flamboyant, and some thought of him as simply a jerk for the way he acted with his "fuddle duddle" comments and the way he seemed to look down at Canadians as if they were much lower in station than him. But assessing his career, at a time of political turmoil, separation at the boiling point, and the need to bring our country together, Pierre Trudeau was a master. And few can fault the way he did that.
I will personally never forget one of his most poignant moments, when the FLQ crisis was happening in 1970, and Trudeau introduced the War Measures Act to try and contain this group of terrorists. As a young 22-year old journalist, I watched with interest as CBC reporter Tim Ralfe asked the PM how far he would go to curb civil liberties to bring peace. Trudeau's reply "Well, just watch me." It was a defining moment in our history, and probably solidified Trudeau's support in Western Canada as a French Canadian Prime Minister who was prepared to do anything necessary to bring an end to the crisis.
I never was a big fan of many of the sections of Trudeau's Charter of Rights and Freedoms, but his concept of a "just society" was hard to oppose. He didn't handle the economy particularly well, and he was criticized roundly for his efforts to centralize power in the federal government over the interests of the provinces, particularly with respect to the oil wealth of the prairies. You may like him or not, but you can't deny that Pierre Trudeau was a leader like no other. His charisma may never be seen again in our country, and his legacy will be here for decades to come.
Tuesday, September 28, 2010
Heartbreak, Tragedy for High Schoolers
(Aired on September 27, 2010)
I have mostly fond memories of my time in high school. Didn't get into too many scraps. Wasn't teased too unmercifully, although it certainly wasn't perfect. I have mostly fond memories of my kids' time in high school. Only one of them got into much trouble. I was probably too over-protective of my kids, and have often wondered if I was too protective.
But seeing things such as those that have happened to a couple of high school girls in the past three weeks, maybe not. And the sad reality is that no matter how over-protective you are, you still can't stop everything. It was probably not a smart move for a young girl to go to a rave in Maple Ridge a couple of weeks ago. Doped up from the date rape drug, she was gang raped, and to make it worse, pictures started showing up on the Internet. While the girl's judgment in going to the party might be considered suspect, considering most of those things are problems from the get-go, what happened to her was devastating and tragic, something she will have to live with the rest of her life. Bad judgment or not, there's no reason for that kind of attack.
If there's a good thing, I suppose, it's that at least she will have a life to live. Not so fortunate was a grade 10 student in Delta, killed on the weekend while walking through a park in broad daylight. Details of both these tragedies are still sketchy, but, by all accounts, these were not bad kids. They were happy kids, enjoying life, probably going through the same issues many teens do, emotional upheaval, peer pressure, we've all gone through it. As parents, we hope our kids survive those rough years intact, and move on to their adult life.
It's hard for us to comprehend the tragedy these two families, and many like them, are going through. I guess the only thing we can do is to keep in touch with our kids as best we can, protect them as well as we can, and hope for the best. Sometimes, unfortunately, our best isn't good enough.
I have mostly fond memories of my time in high school. Didn't get into too many scraps. Wasn't teased too unmercifully, although it certainly wasn't perfect. I have mostly fond memories of my kids' time in high school. Only one of them got into much trouble. I was probably too over-protective of my kids, and have often wondered if I was too protective.
But seeing things such as those that have happened to a couple of high school girls in the past three weeks, maybe not. And the sad reality is that no matter how over-protective you are, you still can't stop everything. It was probably not a smart move for a young girl to go to a rave in Maple Ridge a couple of weeks ago. Doped up from the date rape drug, she was gang raped, and to make it worse, pictures started showing up on the Internet. While the girl's judgment in going to the party might be considered suspect, considering most of those things are problems from the get-go, what happened to her was devastating and tragic, something she will have to live with the rest of her life. Bad judgment or not, there's no reason for that kind of attack.
If there's a good thing, I suppose, it's that at least she will have a life to live. Not so fortunate was a grade 10 student in Delta, killed on the weekend while walking through a park in broad daylight. Details of both these tragedies are still sketchy, but, by all accounts, these were not bad kids. They were happy kids, enjoying life, probably going through the same issues many teens do, emotional upheaval, peer pressure, we've all gone through it. As parents, we hope our kids survive those rough years intact, and move on to their adult life.
It's hard for us to comprehend the tragedy these two families, and many like them, are going through. I guess the only thing we can do is to keep in touch with our kids as best we can, protect them as well as we can, and hope for the best. Sometimes, unfortunately, our best isn't good enough.
Friday, September 24, 2010
Harper Gov't Needs to Rethink Gun Registry Stance
(Aired on September 23, 2010)
If you ask any RCMP officer what's his or her most dangerous assignment, many will tell you it's domestic disputes. Emotions run particularly high, and you never know what will happen in those circumstances. They will also tell you that the more information they have going in, the better they feel about being able to resolve a situation. Prior offenses, restraining orders, history of violence, all are important.
You know what else is important? Whether or not the people have any firearms registered in their names. That's why I can't understand the Conservative government's desire to end the long-gun registry. The government MPs continue to suggest that the registry is stupid because criminals don't register their guns, that the registry only hampers legitimate hunters and gun owners.
In part, that's true. But the reality is that a high percentage of gun offenses, excluding organized crime hits, involve registered guns. Guns that are used in anger in a confrontation often spurred by domestic tension. The more information police have, the better they can serve. You can't foretell everything even if you have all the details, but it would certainly help in the way you deal with issues.
I don't think the long gun registry is perfect. It costs a lot more money than I think it should. And that's one of the arguments against it. But surely there must be ways of dealing with that problem and keeping the registry alive. I understand the concerns over the registry from rural Canada, but I don't believe their frustration should be considered above safety. If the registry has value for the police, that in itself should top any backwoods hunter from feeling frustrated that he has to register his gun. It just makes good common sense.
The Stephen Harper government needs to reevaluate its policies on this issue, and instead of concentrating on defeating the registry, concentrate on things like the economy, and justice and education, issues that have far higher priority than the gun registry.
If you ask any RCMP officer what's his or her most dangerous assignment, many will tell you it's domestic disputes. Emotions run particularly high, and you never know what will happen in those circumstances. They will also tell you that the more information they have going in, the better they feel about being able to resolve a situation. Prior offenses, restraining orders, history of violence, all are important.
You know what else is important? Whether or not the people have any firearms registered in their names. That's why I can't understand the Conservative government's desire to end the long-gun registry. The government MPs continue to suggest that the registry is stupid because criminals don't register their guns, that the registry only hampers legitimate hunters and gun owners.
In part, that's true. But the reality is that a high percentage of gun offenses, excluding organized crime hits, involve registered guns. Guns that are used in anger in a confrontation often spurred by domestic tension. The more information police have, the better they can serve. You can't foretell everything even if you have all the details, but it would certainly help in the way you deal with issues.
I don't think the long gun registry is perfect. It costs a lot more money than I think it should. And that's one of the arguments against it. But surely there must be ways of dealing with that problem and keeping the registry alive. I understand the concerns over the registry from rural Canada, but I don't believe their frustration should be considered above safety. If the registry has value for the police, that in itself should top any backwoods hunter from feeling frustrated that he has to register his gun. It just makes good common sense.
The Stephen Harper government needs to reevaluate its policies on this issue, and instead of concentrating on defeating the registry, concentrate on things like the economy, and justice and education, issues that have far higher priority than the gun registry.
Wednesday, September 22, 2010
Fight HST Turning Serious Debate into Clown Show
(Aired on September 21, 2010)
There probably isn't one person who sees this editorial who is surprised MLA Terry Lake's name is near the top of the list of targets for the anti-HST recall campaign. As the chair of the legislative committee who made the unpopular decision of going to a referendum on the HST, and an MLA who didn't have a big margin of victory last year, that shouldn't be surprising.
Lake's future is hardly in doubt, even though his committee copped out and took the easy way out of the HST controversy by going to a referendum a year away. It was a cop-out because by next September, the fuss over the HST will be gone, and we will have spent millions of dollars on nothing. All because the Liberal members of Lake's committee used the excuse that the referendum was a way to listen to the people instead of having the guts to debate the issue in the legislature and take a vote. This way, they blame the anti-HST forces for causing us to spend all that taxpayers money instead of simply saving it by voting on it instead. And if you're going to have a referendum, have it sooner rather than later so we can have a vote while the issue is still a hot topic.
What I can't figure out, though, is why Bill Vander Zalm and the anti-HST forces are turning the whole recall process into a clown show by making it into some kind of Survivor game. That's about as tactless as Lake's committee's decision on the referendum. If Chris Delaney and VanderZalm are serious about this issue, and they've put a lot of work into it so far, why would they cheapen the whole thing by this charade? Maybe they're simply giving up. They don't even have a proponent to run a recall campaign in Kevin Krueger's riding. Maybe it's all over and the anti-HST folks are just going through the motions. I can't think of anything else given the stupidity of their latest move. This is a serious thing. Treat it that way, or walk away.
There probably isn't one person who sees this editorial who is surprised MLA Terry Lake's name is near the top of the list of targets for the anti-HST recall campaign. As the chair of the legislative committee who made the unpopular decision of going to a referendum on the HST, and an MLA who didn't have a big margin of victory last year, that shouldn't be surprising.
Lake's future is hardly in doubt, even though his committee copped out and took the easy way out of the HST controversy by going to a referendum a year away. It was a cop-out because by next September, the fuss over the HST will be gone, and we will have spent millions of dollars on nothing. All because the Liberal members of Lake's committee used the excuse that the referendum was a way to listen to the people instead of having the guts to debate the issue in the legislature and take a vote. This way, they blame the anti-HST forces for causing us to spend all that taxpayers money instead of simply saving it by voting on it instead. And if you're going to have a referendum, have it sooner rather than later so we can have a vote while the issue is still a hot topic.
What I can't figure out, though, is why Bill Vander Zalm and the anti-HST forces are turning the whole recall process into a clown show by making it into some kind of Survivor game. That's about as tactless as Lake's committee's decision on the referendum. If Chris Delaney and VanderZalm are serious about this issue, and they've put a lot of work into it so far, why would they cheapen the whole thing by this charade? Maybe they're simply giving up. They don't even have a proponent to run a recall campaign in Kevin Krueger's riding. Maybe it's all over and the anti-HST folks are just going through the motions. I can't think of anything else given the stupidity of their latest move. This is a serious thing. Treat it that way, or walk away.
Tougher Drunk Driving Laws Long Overdue
(Aired on September 20, 2010)
British Columbia now has the toughest drunk driving laws in Canada. Starting today, it's going to be easier for law enforcement officials to take away your car, slap you with a fine and take away your driving privileges. Not only for the drivers who are over .08, but there's a new "warning" category, where you can lose your licence for three days and pay a fine to boot. Over .08, penalties are even stiffer. You could get a 90 day driving ban. And speeders caught doing more than 40 clicks over the speed limit will be affected too, getting their vehicles impounded for a week with escalating penalties for subsequent offences.
It's about time. It's also good that refusing to take a breathalyzer test at the scene is no longer a way out. The penalty is immediate. It will make all of us think twice, not only those who drink more heavily, but even those of us who are more social drinkers. Speed and alcohol are contributors to so many accidents that it's about time we tried to take steps to curb the problem. And the Liberal government, who have been criticized on so many fronts recently, deserve to take some credit for this latest initiative. It's long overdue and hopefully will serve as a model for other provinces to follow.
The only problem I see is having the police resources to enforce these laws. We actually catch very few problem drivers. Our resources don't provide for the traffic checks we need to enforce these laws. We'll certainly do a better job than before even with the resources we have now, but we will almost certainly only catch a small percentage of offenders unless we put enough officers in place to really do an effective job. That might be a little longer in coming. But at least we've made a start, and hopefully we'll get people thinking before they become idiots on the road.
British Columbia now has the toughest drunk driving laws in Canada. Starting today, it's going to be easier for law enforcement officials to take away your car, slap you with a fine and take away your driving privileges. Not only for the drivers who are over .08, but there's a new "warning" category, where you can lose your licence for three days and pay a fine to boot. Over .08, penalties are even stiffer. You could get a 90 day driving ban. And speeders caught doing more than 40 clicks over the speed limit will be affected too, getting their vehicles impounded for a week with escalating penalties for subsequent offences.
It's about time. It's also good that refusing to take a breathalyzer test at the scene is no longer a way out. The penalty is immediate. It will make all of us think twice, not only those who drink more heavily, but even those of us who are more social drinkers. Speed and alcohol are contributors to so many accidents that it's about time we tried to take steps to curb the problem. And the Liberal government, who have been criticized on so many fronts recently, deserve to take some credit for this latest initiative. It's long overdue and hopefully will serve as a model for other provinces to follow.
The only problem I see is having the police resources to enforce these laws. We actually catch very few problem drivers. Our resources don't provide for the traffic checks we need to enforce these laws. We'll certainly do a better job than before even with the resources we have now, but we will almost certainly only catch a small percentage of offenders unless we put enough officers in place to really do an effective job. That might be a little longer in coming. But at least we've made a start, and hopefully we'll get people thinking before they become idiots on the road.
Monday, September 20, 2010
Random Acts of Kindness Should Not be Random
(Aired on September 16, 2010)
I believe it is a sad state of the human condition that we have to celebrate random acts of kindness. Or find inspirational stories so newsworthy. We're starting a series this fall on inspirational stories. We'll get to see how special people do some very special things. But it's sad in a way, because we do this in part because as a society we seem to have lost the ability to care about each other.
Frankly, random acts of kindness should not be random. When you see something that needs to be done, a friend or a stranger who needs help, these should be the norm. Helping someone put their groceries in their car, saying hello, letting someone merge instead of trying to cut them off. I could go on. Those are simple acts of kindness that should be part of our daily lives.
People who inspire me are not the glory seekers, the ones who do things with personal gain and recognition as a motive. No, the people who inspire me are those who go out of their way to help, who help look after their elderly parents, who do these things not for themselves but for the cause of good. These are truly the people who are exceptional, who give us our own motivation to do the same. The did it because it needed doing. One can only wish there could be more like them.
I believe it is a sad state of the human condition that we have to celebrate random acts of kindness. Or find inspirational stories so newsworthy. We're starting a series this fall on inspirational stories. We'll get to see how special people do some very special things. But it's sad in a way, because we do this in part because as a society we seem to have lost the ability to care about each other.
Frankly, random acts of kindness should not be random. When you see something that needs to be done, a friend or a stranger who needs help, these should be the norm. Helping someone put their groceries in their car, saying hello, letting someone merge instead of trying to cut them off. I could go on. Those are simple acts of kindness that should be part of our daily lives.
People who inspire me are not the glory seekers, the ones who do things with personal gain and recognition as a motive. No, the people who inspire me are those who go out of their way to help, who help look after their elderly parents, who do these things not for themselves but for the cause of good. These are truly the people who are exceptional, who give us our own motivation to do the same. The did it because it needed doing. One can only wish there could be more like them.
Thursday, September 16, 2010
Driving Never Ceases to Enrage
(Aired on September 14, 2010)
Some things that really tick me off about drivers. Number one, inattention. Whether it's driving while talking on the cell, texting, eating, drinking your flavored coffee, the stupidity of some drivers who try to drive while distracted is absolutely amazing. It's more amazing that more accidents aren't caused by these goofballs who are more worried about what someone said in a text, or having a puff of that cigarette than they are about peoples' lives.
Second, drivers who don't know the rules of the road. How many times do you see people trying to merge who don't understand the concept of merging. They will stop or slow right down just when they should be speeding up, and on the other side of the coin, there are those who just won't let people merge into their lane no matter what. And the people who make left turns into the wrong lane of traffic. They don't understand that they have to turn into the lane that's closest to them. Idiots.
And the thing that ticks me off the most - drivers who drive with their dogs in the back of their pickups. Makes we wish I had a shotgun to put the animal down - the driver that is, not the dog. I've had the unfortunate occurrence of seeing dogs fall out of the back of pickup beds, with tragic endings in several cases.
We need to have officers on street corners who have the magical power to shut the power off to offenders' engines, scoop up the vehicle with a tow truck, and give the drivers a couple of months suspension. Where is Harry Potter when you need him?
Some things that really tick me off about drivers. Number one, inattention. Whether it's driving while talking on the cell, texting, eating, drinking your flavored coffee, the stupidity of some drivers who try to drive while distracted is absolutely amazing. It's more amazing that more accidents aren't caused by these goofballs who are more worried about what someone said in a text, or having a puff of that cigarette than they are about peoples' lives.
Second, drivers who don't know the rules of the road. How many times do you see people trying to merge who don't understand the concept of merging. They will stop or slow right down just when they should be speeding up, and on the other side of the coin, there are those who just won't let people merge into their lane no matter what. And the people who make left turns into the wrong lane of traffic. They don't understand that they have to turn into the lane that's closest to them. Idiots.
And the thing that ticks me off the most - drivers who drive with their dogs in the back of their pickups. Makes we wish I had a shotgun to put the animal down - the driver that is, not the dog. I've had the unfortunate occurrence of seeing dogs fall out of the back of pickup beds, with tragic endings in several cases.
We need to have officers on street corners who have the magical power to shut the power off to offenders' engines, scoop up the vehicle with a tow truck, and give the drivers a couple of months suspension. Where is Harry Potter when you need him?
Tuesday, September 14, 2010
Must Be an Effort to Protect Our Agricultural Land
(Aired on September 13, 2010)
Perhaps a new report out this week will finally address one of the critical problems facing us these days - trying to keep prime agricultural land from being developed in the face of increasing pressure from developers. There is a huge glut of land that is totally useful for housing, except that it may require a bit more challenge to develop. So developers want to use the best ranch land and the best arable land to develop because, for the most part, it's flat, and takes less money to put houses and condos on it than land which may be on a hillside or may not be the best to grow crops.
This new report from Auditor General John Doyle says the Agricultural Land Commission doesn't have enough staff or enforcement tools to protect land that is in the reserve. And he adds the agency doesn't have enough information to properly evaluate the results of its decision. The ALR has been under pressure for years from developers who want to continue to spread out development as opposed to trying to going to the European style, keeping green spaces while making smaller houses, and more flats and apartments. If you examine how much prime land has been destroyed around this country's largest cities, you can see how this problem is going to grow.
The ALR was a great idea, and has since been the subject of many attempts to destroy it. There have been times when I have disagreed with the ALR, but the idea of having some control over the rampant destruction of farmland is important to the lifestyle of generations to come. I don't know how many times I have heard how we'll be able to grown more on less space as technology improves, that hasn't happened. Sooner or later, it will come back to bite us, and any preventive action we take now will only benefit us down the road.
Perhaps a new report out this week will finally address one of the critical problems facing us these days - trying to keep prime agricultural land from being developed in the face of increasing pressure from developers. There is a huge glut of land that is totally useful for housing, except that it may require a bit more challenge to develop. So developers want to use the best ranch land and the best arable land to develop because, for the most part, it's flat, and takes less money to put houses and condos on it than land which may be on a hillside or may not be the best to grow crops.
This new report from Auditor General John Doyle says the Agricultural Land Commission doesn't have enough staff or enforcement tools to protect land that is in the reserve. And he adds the agency doesn't have enough information to properly evaluate the results of its decision. The ALR has been under pressure for years from developers who want to continue to spread out development as opposed to trying to going to the European style, keeping green spaces while making smaller houses, and more flats and apartments. If you examine how much prime land has been destroyed around this country's largest cities, you can see how this problem is going to grow.
The ALR was a great idea, and has since been the subject of many attempts to destroy it. There have been times when I have disagreed with the ALR, but the idea of having some control over the rampant destruction of farmland is important to the lifestyle of generations to come. I don't know how many times I have heard how we'll be able to grown more on less space as technology improves, that hasn't happened. Sooner or later, it will come back to bite us, and any preventive action we take now will only benefit us down the road.
Friday, September 10, 2010
Koran-Burning Pastor Taking Religious Freedom Too Far
(Aired on September 9, 2010)
In two days, we will mark the tragedy that took place September 11, 2001. Few of us will forget where we were when the World Trade Centre collapsed after being sabotaged by two jets which crashed into the buildings. 3000 people lost their lives. The incidents provoked much anti-Arab and particularly anti-Muslim sentiment. Sentiment that still prevails in many peoples minds today.
A Muslim mosque being planned for a site near ground zero in New York is being vilified by those who see it as in some way mocking the Americans killed in the 9/11 attacks. Some minister at some church in Gainesville, Florida is planning a Koran-burning ceremony Saturday to somehow send a message to radical Muslims. It is something, he says, he believes God has called upon him to do. Must be a different God than the one I have learned to believe in. Many Christians have protested the burning of the 200 Korans as being bigoted and senseless. And indeed it is. This is a minister using the same type of religious fanaticism he is accusing the radical Muslims of using in 9/11.
Ironic, isn't it? You really have to wonder about some of these religious groups who use their own interpretation of things and create chaos with beliefs that can't be substantiated in any way, shape or form. We get angry at Muslims who misinterpret the Koran and somehow believe it gives them the right to create terror. And yet these weird Christian groups do exactly the same thing when they misinterpret the Bible and create their own version of Christianity. That's when you get a group like this one in Florida who says that burning the Koran is a message from God to radical Muslims. They don't represent a lot of people in their own individual church, but it only takes one person to start the ball rolling.
It appears there is little anyone can do to stop the Koran-burning Saturday. It's sad to say that freedom of religion can be carried to that extent.
In two days, we will mark the tragedy that took place September 11, 2001. Few of us will forget where we were when the World Trade Centre collapsed after being sabotaged by two jets which crashed into the buildings. 3000 people lost their lives. The incidents provoked much anti-Arab and particularly anti-Muslim sentiment. Sentiment that still prevails in many peoples minds today.
A Muslim mosque being planned for a site near ground zero in New York is being vilified by those who see it as in some way mocking the Americans killed in the 9/11 attacks. Some minister at some church in Gainesville, Florida is planning a Koran-burning ceremony Saturday to somehow send a message to radical Muslims. It is something, he says, he believes God has called upon him to do. Must be a different God than the one I have learned to believe in. Many Christians have protested the burning of the 200 Korans as being bigoted and senseless. And indeed it is. This is a minister using the same type of religious fanaticism he is accusing the radical Muslims of using in 9/11.
Ironic, isn't it? You really have to wonder about some of these religious groups who use their own interpretation of things and create chaos with beliefs that can't be substantiated in any way, shape or form. We get angry at Muslims who misinterpret the Koran and somehow believe it gives them the right to create terror. And yet these weird Christian groups do exactly the same thing when they misinterpret the Bible and create their own version of Christianity. That's when you get a group like this one in Florida who says that burning the Koran is a message from God to radical Muslims. They don't represent a lot of people in their own individual church, but it only takes one person to start the ball rolling.
It appears there is little anyone can do to stop the Koran-burning Saturday. It's sad to say that freedom of religion can be carried to that extent.
Wednesday, September 8, 2010
Many More Good Teachers Than Bad
(Aired on September 7, 2010)
Teachers have not always been my favorite group of people. I sometimes have argued vociferously against some of the contract provisions they have. I have taken issue with the fact you can't seem to get rid of a bad teacher. I don't like the arrogant attitude of some teachers.
But now that I've said all that, I would like to add that I have many close friends who are teachers or retired teachers, and I spend hours talking education with them. There is no better person than a good teacher. As kids start back to school today, I have to say I admire someone who will try to impart knowledge to a group of kids who are paying attention with only half a mind, spend half their time texting, doodling, whatever and generally not focused on learning at all. Thank goodness that's only a small portion of the class, but it's enough to be a huge challenge.
I wouldn't be a teacher for anything. I don't have the attitude to bear through the idiots to reach out to those who really are there to learn. I admire their tenacity, their compassion and their diligence. For the few teachers I would just as soon not know, there are ten times as many who spend countless hours trying to make a difference. It's a terribly difficult job, particularly in these times when parental control of kids is probably the worst its ever been, and as soon as teachers try to discipline a student in any way, suddenly those righteous parents become totally obnoxious and indignant.
I don't want to say teachers are perfect. I do have some concerns about the militant attitude of some of them. But when push comes to shove, they have a job that is hugely rewarding, but at the same time hugely challenging. It's not a job I'd take on. I'll just stay behind the camera, and make my comments without having to try and deal with a group of kids who really don't care.
Teachers have not always been my favorite group of people. I sometimes have argued vociferously against some of the contract provisions they have. I have taken issue with the fact you can't seem to get rid of a bad teacher. I don't like the arrogant attitude of some teachers.
But now that I've said all that, I would like to add that I have many close friends who are teachers or retired teachers, and I spend hours talking education with them. There is no better person than a good teacher. As kids start back to school today, I have to say I admire someone who will try to impart knowledge to a group of kids who are paying attention with only half a mind, spend half their time texting, doodling, whatever and generally not focused on learning at all. Thank goodness that's only a small portion of the class, but it's enough to be a huge challenge.
I wouldn't be a teacher for anything. I don't have the attitude to bear through the idiots to reach out to those who really are there to learn. I admire their tenacity, their compassion and their diligence. For the few teachers I would just as soon not know, there are ten times as many who spend countless hours trying to make a difference. It's a terribly difficult job, particularly in these times when parental control of kids is probably the worst its ever been, and as soon as teachers try to discipline a student in any way, suddenly those righteous parents become totally obnoxious and indignant.
I don't want to say teachers are perfect. I do have some concerns about the militant attitude of some of them. But when push comes to shove, they have a job that is hugely rewarding, but at the same time hugely challenging. It's not a job I'd take on. I'll just stay behind the camera, and make my comments without having to try and deal with a group of kids who really don't care.
Tuesday, September 7, 2010
Hard to Trust Politicians After HST Revelation
(Aired on September 2, 2010)
It's hard to believe now that the B.C. government, or at least the Minister of Finance, didn't have some advance knowledge of the HST before last year's provincial election. It's no wonder politicians are so low on the list of people most trusted by the public. So much damage control, so much double talk it's so hard to know who, if anyone, you can believe.
New information out shows that bureaucrats in the finance ministry were preparing briefing notes for Finance Minister Colin Hansen well before last year's election campaign. This contrasts directly with government statements that the government didn't start discussing the issue until much later.
While the information shows Hansen may not have pushed the tax heavily until after the election, it's hard to imagine that he had absolutely no knowledge of what people under his control were doing. Hansen says he didn't ask for the research to be done, and staff were doing it on their own. Hansen says they were just doing their job researching tax policy and weren't taking any direction from the Liberals. If that's true, then Hansen wasn't doing his job. If the Minister doesn't know what his bureaucrats are doing, he isn't doing his job keeping track of what's happening in his department. And I find that really hard to stomach. If that's the case, Hansen should be turfed for incompetence.
Either way, the government comes out the loser, and we lose even more faith in our politicians. I've been around this game a long time, and I often try to think back to when we really started to lose faith in our elected officials. Was it Watergate that started it all? Or were there times before that when government scandals rocked our senses? Whenever it started, it seems to have ballooned to alarming proportions. And now it doesn't matter what government says, we have our doubts about their sincerity, their honesty and integrity. And that's a very sad state of affairs.
It's hard to believe now that the B.C. government, or at least the Minister of Finance, didn't have some advance knowledge of the HST before last year's provincial election. It's no wonder politicians are so low on the list of people most trusted by the public. So much damage control, so much double talk it's so hard to know who, if anyone, you can believe.
New information out shows that bureaucrats in the finance ministry were preparing briefing notes for Finance Minister Colin Hansen well before last year's election campaign. This contrasts directly with government statements that the government didn't start discussing the issue until much later.
While the information shows Hansen may not have pushed the tax heavily until after the election, it's hard to imagine that he had absolutely no knowledge of what people under his control were doing. Hansen says he didn't ask for the research to be done, and staff were doing it on their own. Hansen says they were just doing their job researching tax policy and weren't taking any direction from the Liberals. If that's true, then Hansen wasn't doing his job. If the Minister doesn't know what his bureaucrats are doing, he isn't doing his job keeping track of what's happening in his department. And I find that really hard to stomach. If that's the case, Hansen should be turfed for incompetence.
Either way, the government comes out the loser, and we lose even more faith in our politicians. I've been around this game a long time, and I often try to think back to when we really started to lose faith in our elected officials. Was it Watergate that started it all? Or were there times before that when government scandals rocked our senses? Whenever it started, it seems to have ballooned to alarming proportions. And now it doesn't matter what government says, we have our doubts about their sincerity, their honesty and integrity. And that's a very sad state of affairs.
Wednesday, September 1, 2010
Tamil Refugees Abusing the System
(Aired on August 31, 2010)
The case of the MV Sun Sea has proven once again that our immigration policies are in bad need of reform. We have a group of almost 500 people seeking refuge in Canada, making what may or may not be a claim of persecution in their homeland and wishing to be taken into Canada. But there's far too much of this going on and we need to tighten the regulations.
In this case, Border Services themselves seem to have screwed up the process as much as anyone. When the people arrived, they took all their ID and put them into containers. Now they have a problem trying to sort out who's who. That was a huge mistake. Right now, they can't even identify the captain and crew. We will spend millions trying to determine if these people are legitimate refugees. How many of them are terrorists in disguise?
Accepting people in this way is wrong. And while it may seem unsympathetic, how many legitimate refugees will be turned away while we are processing this group we should never have accepted. If getting into Canada is as simple as saying you'll be persecuted in your own country, we'll open the doors to so many poor choices it will cost us terribly down the road.
Immigration into a country should be an opportunity to start fresh, to bring something new to a country that needs immigrants. But the process should not be as messy as it is with the MV Sun Sea. We will probably never know how many of these people are legitimate and how many aren't. It's not the right way to deal with immigrants to our country.
To have 500 people show up on your doorstep all claiming refugee status is an abuse of the system, and just shouldn't be tolerated. Immigration is a good thing for our country. We need immigrants. But we need legitimate immigrants, who follow the procedure and don't try to play on Canadians' good moral sense to get in.
The case of the MV Sun Sea has proven once again that our immigration policies are in bad need of reform. We have a group of almost 500 people seeking refuge in Canada, making what may or may not be a claim of persecution in their homeland and wishing to be taken into Canada. But there's far too much of this going on and we need to tighten the regulations.
In this case, Border Services themselves seem to have screwed up the process as much as anyone. When the people arrived, they took all their ID and put them into containers. Now they have a problem trying to sort out who's who. That was a huge mistake. Right now, they can't even identify the captain and crew. We will spend millions trying to determine if these people are legitimate refugees. How many of them are terrorists in disguise?
Accepting people in this way is wrong. And while it may seem unsympathetic, how many legitimate refugees will be turned away while we are processing this group we should never have accepted. If getting into Canada is as simple as saying you'll be persecuted in your own country, we'll open the doors to so many poor choices it will cost us terribly down the road.
Immigration into a country should be an opportunity to start fresh, to bring something new to a country that needs immigrants. But the process should not be as messy as it is with the MV Sun Sea. We will probably never know how many of these people are legitimate and how many aren't. It's not the right way to deal with immigrants to our country.
To have 500 people show up on your doorstep all claiming refugee status is an abuse of the system, and just shouldn't be tolerated. Immigration is a good thing for our country. We need immigrants. But we need legitimate immigrants, who follow the procedure and don't try to play on Canadians' good moral sense to get in.
Krueger's Arts Tenure a Disaster
(Aired on August 30, 2010)
Kevin Krueger's run as Minister of Arts and Culture hasn't had much of a positive run so far. In fact, you could safely say it's been an unmitigated disaster. When Krueger took over the portfolio, I thought that, based on his previous commitment to arts and cultural activities that we would have an advocate to promote the arts and improve their lot in life.
Arts, as you know, often is the first cut when governments decide to slash. They mistakenly think cutting the arts won't be noticed and doesn't do a whole lot of harm. As we know, they've been proved wrong. Government has cut gaming money to arts groups, cut regular grant programs and generally left the arts community in shambles. So much so that the head of the B.C. Arts Council has resigned in protest. And Krueger has been strangely silent. He seldom returns our phone calls, he seldom has anything concrete to say, except to spout the Liberal line that the Liberals have put more money into the arts than the NDP did. Kevin has to stop spouting that line. It's old. And what the NDP did years ago has no real bearing on what the government is doing now.
A vibrant arts community is important to the health of any city, town or village. And funding has to be maintained in order for those communities to survive. When communities don't have a consistent source of funding, and know what they're getting year to year, they can't move forward. They can't put on productions, hire staff, because they don't know if they will have the funds to do so. While education and health are absolutely critical, and health particularly is in dire straits, government can't ignore other things that help us maintain a healthy lifestyle, and arts and culture play a major role in a healthy community.
Kevin and the Liberals are strangely silent on what will become an issue, for sure, in the next election. And while the Liberals generally feel that Kamloops-South Thompson is a safe Liberal riding, many of those in Krueger's riding are people who appreciate what arts and culture do in a city like Kamloops, and they may not forget that in May of 2013.
Kevin Krueger's run as Minister of Arts and Culture hasn't had much of a positive run so far. In fact, you could safely say it's been an unmitigated disaster. When Krueger took over the portfolio, I thought that, based on his previous commitment to arts and cultural activities that we would have an advocate to promote the arts and improve their lot in life.
Arts, as you know, often is the first cut when governments decide to slash. They mistakenly think cutting the arts won't be noticed and doesn't do a whole lot of harm. As we know, they've been proved wrong. Government has cut gaming money to arts groups, cut regular grant programs and generally left the arts community in shambles. So much so that the head of the B.C. Arts Council has resigned in protest. And Krueger has been strangely silent. He seldom returns our phone calls, he seldom has anything concrete to say, except to spout the Liberal line that the Liberals have put more money into the arts than the NDP did. Kevin has to stop spouting that line. It's old. And what the NDP did years ago has no real bearing on what the government is doing now.
A vibrant arts community is important to the health of any city, town or village. And funding has to be maintained in order for those communities to survive. When communities don't have a consistent source of funding, and know what they're getting year to year, they can't move forward. They can't put on productions, hire staff, because they don't know if they will have the funds to do so. While education and health are absolutely critical, and health particularly is in dire straits, government can't ignore other things that help us maintain a healthy lifestyle, and arts and culture play a major role in a healthy community.
Kevin and the Liberals are strangely silent on what will become an issue, for sure, in the next election. And while the Liberals generally feel that Kamloops-South Thompson is a safe Liberal riding, many of those in Krueger's riding are people who appreciate what arts and culture do in a city like Kamloops, and they may not forget that in May of 2013.
Monday, August 30, 2010
No Choice But to Euthanize Bears
(Aired on August 26, 2010)
I'm as big an animal lover as there is. I love animals. Am sad to the point of tears sometimes when I see a dead deer at the side of the highway, love having wildlife in my yard even when they take a good round out of the shrubs.
But I honestly believe an online petition trying to save about 15 bears in the Kootenays is just a little over the top. The bears were being fed by some people charged in a grow op. We don't know if they were being fed to keep them around to scare people away from the property, or whether they were kind of pets. But the fact is, most of them have become domesticated. As such, they cannot be saved from being put down. Maybe they could be transported to some zoos, maybe some of them could be returned to the wild, but any information I've received indicates that once these animals become used to human contact, and used to raiding the garbage in cities, it's hard to get them back into the wild. Sad as it is, these animals may have to be put down before they become a menace.
Some suggest they could be weaned back into the wild, and we should have the province put up some kind of transitional feeding station that would get them back into the wild. But it's not going to work. The people who fed these bears have made it such that the bears' lives have become too easy, no work involved when you get your daily fix from the neighbours. You don't even have to lift a garbage can lid for goodness sakes.
While protecting wildlife is a good thing, sometimes circumstances are such that protection is unrealistic. These seem to be some of those circumstances. As tragic as it would be to have to put some of these bears down, the reality is that they can't be left as they are, and if there aren't zoos or refuges to take them, and they can't be reacclimatized to the wild, there is little choice left but to put them down so they don't endanger anyone.
I'm as big an animal lover as there is. I love animals. Am sad to the point of tears sometimes when I see a dead deer at the side of the highway, love having wildlife in my yard even when they take a good round out of the shrubs.
But I honestly believe an online petition trying to save about 15 bears in the Kootenays is just a little over the top. The bears were being fed by some people charged in a grow op. We don't know if they were being fed to keep them around to scare people away from the property, or whether they were kind of pets. But the fact is, most of them have become domesticated. As such, they cannot be saved from being put down. Maybe they could be transported to some zoos, maybe some of them could be returned to the wild, but any information I've received indicates that once these animals become used to human contact, and used to raiding the garbage in cities, it's hard to get them back into the wild. Sad as it is, these animals may have to be put down before they become a menace.
Some suggest they could be weaned back into the wild, and we should have the province put up some kind of transitional feeding station that would get them back into the wild. But it's not going to work. The people who fed these bears have made it such that the bears' lives have become too easy, no work involved when you get your daily fix from the neighbours. You don't even have to lift a garbage can lid for goodness sakes.
While protecting wildlife is a good thing, sometimes circumstances are such that protection is unrealistic. These seem to be some of those circumstances. As tragic as it would be to have to put some of these bears down, the reality is that they can't be left as they are, and if there aren't zoos or refuges to take them, and they can't be reacclimatized to the wild, there is little choice left but to put them down so they don't endanger anyone.
Wednesday, August 25, 2010
Public Starting to Worry About Health Care
(Aired on August 24, 2010)
It is the perfect storm. It's been coming for some time. I wasn't the first to talk about it years ago, but I have said many times over the years the health care system is in jeopardy and needs to be overhauled. And a new Ipsos-Reid survey out this week shows most Canadians are starting to get the picture. It's taken them a long time to understand just how bad it is, but the new survey shows they're getting the message.
The new poll shows that most people perceived no improvement in health care. Younger adults anticipate going into debt to pay for their health care. Boomers, otherwise known as the Silver Tsunami, are becoming more and more reliant, pointing out just how tough it's going to be. The poll showed 80% fear the system will buckle and maybe even fail under the growing pressure. It says 80% nationally give the health system a grade of A, but few think that will continue.
Doctors have said for some time they are not crying wolf-that the health system is in disarray. Maybe more of the people nationwide who feel the same will start to put the pressure on the government to do something. Some suggest user fees rather than higher taxes. I've advocated user fees for 20 years. Interestingly enough, the survey showed British Columbians last or second last in their confidence level in health care. The only other province was Quebec, where 2.5 million people in that province are without a regular family doctor, out of a population of 7.5 million. Over a quarter of the population.
B.C. rates virtually last in rating the health care experience, only 25% of us gave a good grade for services available, and only 17% gave health care providers a good grade. That should be something for Gordon Campbell and the Liberals to take under serious advisement. If the economic downturn didn't hit B.C. as bad as other provinces, why can't we do better?
It's been obvious for a long time that something needs to be done. The general population finally seems to be getting the message. Now let's see if we can convince the politicians.
It is the perfect storm. It's been coming for some time. I wasn't the first to talk about it years ago, but I have said many times over the years the health care system is in jeopardy and needs to be overhauled. And a new Ipsos-Reid survey out this week shows most Canadians are starting to get the picture. It's taken them a long time to understand just how bad it is, but the new survey shows they're getting the message.
The new poll shows that most people perceived no improvement in health care. Younger adults anticipate going into debt to pay for their health care. Boomers, otherwise known as the Silver Tsunami, are becoming more and more reliant, pointing out just how tough it's going to be. The poll showed 80% fear the system will buckle and maybe even fail under the growing pressure. It says 80% nationally give the health system a grade of A, but few think that will continue.
Doctors have said for some time they are not crying wolf-that the health system is in disarray. Maybe more of the people nationwide who feel the same will start to put the pressure on the government to do something. Some suggest user fees rather than higher taxes. I've advocated user fees for 20 years. Interestingly enough, the survey showed British Columbians last or second last in their confidence level in health care. The only other province was Quebec, where 2.5 million people in that province are without a regular family doctor, out of a population of 7.5 million. Over a quarter of the population.
B.C. rates virtually last in rating the health care experience, only 25% of us gave a good grade for services available, and only 17% gave health care providers a good grade. That should be something for Gordon Campbell and the Liberals to take under serious advisement. If the economic downturn didn't hit B.C. as bad as other provinces, why can't we do better?
It's been obvious for a long time that something needs to be done. The general population finally seems to be getting the message. Now let's see if we can convince the politicians.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
