Five conversations Canadians need to have in 2015

SLM

The Velvet Hammer
Mar 5, 2011
29,151
3
36
London, Ontario
Five conversations Canadians need to have in 2015

The Globe and Mail
Published Friday, Jan. 02 2015, 5:00 PM EST
Last updated Friday, Jan. 02 2015, 5:00 PM EST




Canada is one of the world’s richest, safest, fairest, most peaceful and best-governed countries. Graded on the curve, this country comes out near the top, and always has. But graded on an absolute scale, there’s a lot of room for improvement.
Canada’s success is partly a happy accident: We can thank sheer luck for our natural resources, the parliamentary and legal systems we inherited, and sharing the world’s longest undefended border with the planet’s most dynamic culture and economy. Canada got to be Canada in part by winning the global lottery. But this country’s success is also the product of good choices.
Canada has a history of thoughtful arguments over big issues – battles of ideas, powered by reason and evidence, and not just shouting matches. Think of the creation of medicare. Think of free trade. The policy choices that came out of those debates made a better Canada. And the more Canadians can have intelligent, honest conversations about today’s big issues, the better choices this country will make.
In 2015, here are some conversations Canadians need to have:


Crime and punishment: This country avoided many of the mistakes of a U.S. justice system that is often brutal and counterproductive. But cases like those of Ashley Smith and Edward Snowshoe, whose difficult lives were worsened and ultimately ended by solitary confinement and misguided attempts at correction, should remind Canadians that our system is far from perfect, and may be getting worse.
Consider: A high percentage of the people behind bars have serious mental health issues. Is more punishment going to cure them? Is more or less treatment going to help?
Consider: Almost everyone who is behind bars is going to get out. Their sentences are not forever, and they will soon walk the same streets as you. They will soon be your neighbours. Would doing more to educate, treat and humanize them help them become good neighbours? Or would worsening their conditions of incarceration be more likely to produce peaceful, model citizens?
We need to have a rational conversation about this.


Pipelines: Not every pipeline proposal deserves a green light. (This space has had reservations about the Northern Gateway project, for example.) But unless you’re planning on outlawing motor vehicles and shutting down the oil industry, you need to use and move oil. Pipe is generally the most efficient and safe way to do it. Thousands upon thousands of miles of pipe already criss-cross the continent. Ever more oil is being produced in both Canada and the U.S. – all of which has to be moved. Much of this new North American oil is displacing oil that is already moving by rail, or being imported by ship from across the ocean.
In parts of Canada, the discussion around all of this is sometimes detached from that reality. For example, Ontario and Quebec are not currently oil-free zones, in case anyone driving their Range Rover to an environmental protest needs to be reminded. New pipe from the West means replacing oil that has long arrived from overseas. And some of those ships bringing oil to Canada may soon reverse the flow, carrying Canadian oil across the sea from the same ports in Quebec and New Brunswick. All of this has to be done to the highest environmental standards. But Canada is not an oil virgin, and we can’t have any honest conversation if we pretend otherwise.


Climate change: The right is right about pipelines – but the left is correct about climate change. The thing is, it’s possible for Canada to have an oil industry, and pipelines, and to also take significant steps to reduce global warming. There’s no necessary contradiction. In fact, people on the right – see Preston Manning’s recent comments in support of carbon taxes – are starting to realize that caring about pollution shouldn’t be left to the left. It could easily be turned into a right-wing issue. Or – let us dream a little – a non-partisan issue.
We think British Columbia’s carbon tax, which involves taxing fuels like gasoline while equally lowering income and other taxes, is the way to go. It cut B.C.’s carbon emissions by much more than the national average even as B.C.’s economy grew faster than the national average.
The B.C. model is just one of many. But the basic idea of putting higher taxes on things we want less of, like pollution, and lowering taxes on things we want more of – income, investment, savings – is something Conservatives, Liberals, New Democrats and Greens should all be able to support.
After all, who’s in favour of raising taxes on income and lowering taxes on pollution? Anyone?


Aboriginal Canada: This country needs an honest conversation about how to lift up native Canadians, so the average aboriginal Canadian enjoys the same standard of living as the average Canadian. That discussion will raise uncomfortable questions for federal and provincial governments. But it will also put unsettling questions to Canada’s native leadership, which sometimes acts as if the solution lies in moving native Canada back to the 15th century, and not forward into the 21st.


Policing: You cannot have law without police, but neither can you have police who are above the law, or a public perception that they might be. Any measures of greater police oversight– such as the wearing of body cameras by officers, as this page has called for – is not about punishing or undermining police officers. It is not about siding with criminals. It is about ensuring that everyone in society respects the law, especially those who are sworn to uphold it. That’s a good place to start a conversation.


Five conversations Canadians need to have in 2015 - The Globe and Mail


I don't necessarily agree with the stand taken in the article for each issue but I will agree they are important issues that require rational discussion. Unfortunately, if this forum is any indication, rational discussion of these issues is a pipe dream.
 

JamesBondo

House Member
Mar 3, 2012
4,158
37
48
What is with the editorial style comments about the USA? Is it neccessary to slip those into an article like this?
 

captain morgan

Hall of Fame Member
Mar 28, 2009
28,429
146
63
A Mouse Once Bit My Sister
Crime and punishment:

Crime is crime, but there is no real, tangible punishment.


  • Institute a system of compensation to the victim payable by the perp.
  • Incarceration should involve a work element that pays market value; payable in part to the victim and in part to the institution.
  • Criminal leaves prison with a marketable skill


Pipelines:


  • You want energy, you need to bring it to the consumer.
  • Pipelines are a political football and that's it. The alts are truck, rail or bucket-brigade - you choose


Climate change:
but the left is correct about climate change.

Anthro GW or Climate Change is a crock. This is evidenced by the International bodies jockeying to 'tax' emitters under the guise that they will reduce all the while knowing that any reduction is impossible where your population is increasing.

Interestingly enough, the tax revenues go to pay for their bloated admin and select pay-offs to select countries that get 'developing nation' status.

If there is any question remaining about AGW, simply look to the accuracy of the predictions and models over the last 15 years... None of them have held any basis in reality.... That said, only a fool will blindly accept the 'facts' based on such a dismal record of failure



The thing is, it’s possible for Canada to have an oil industry, and pipelines, and to also take significant steps to reduce global warming.


  • If you believe that AGW is baseless, then the above is not an issue.
  • If you are a dyed in the wool truther, then what is the technological alternative?
  • FYI - it's supposed to fall to -45 in Winnipeg today... How many solar panels and wind mills do they need to keep the pipes from freezing?

see Preston Manning’s recent comments in support of carbon taxes – are starting to realize that caring about pollution shouldn’t be left to the left.


  • Carbon isn't pollution, it is the building block of all life on this planet
  • It absolutely boggles the mind that people can't see that this is just a tax based on a trendy, theoretical belief and nothing more.
  • Cost of living will go up proportionally to the tax and the demographic that will get nailed the worst is those the lowest part of the income scale.
  • All this does is raise the cost of living for everyone


We think British Columbia’s carbon tax, which involves taxing fuels like gasoline while equally lowering income and other taxes, is the way to go.

Ask a BC resident how this zero-sum tax scheme is working out for them.

It cut B.C.’s carbon emissions by much more than the national average even as B.C.’s economy grew faster than the national average.

Nonsense. BC's industrial capacity has eroded big time over the last 20 years. The basis of the economy is squarely on foreign direct investment in the R/E sector


Aboriginal Canada:

Give the land rights directly to the individuals and cut-out the archaic and corrupt FN gvts... Eliminate the Teressa Spence's of the world and this will be the first, biggest step to addressing this issue

: You cannot have law without police, but neither can you have police who are above the law,

A dramatic over reaction by the Globe and Mail influenced by the the death of that choir boy and wee angel Michael Brown

or a public perception that they might be.

That is a losing argument with the presence of bleeding heart lefties that want to coddle and reward those that break the law

Any measures of greater police oversight– such as the wearing of body cameras by officers,

Smart idea
 

taxslave

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 25, 2008
36,362
4,337
113
Vancouver Island
Crime is crime, but there is no real, tangible punishment.


  • Institute a system of compensation to the victim payable by the perp.
  • Incarceration should involve a work element that pays market value; payable in part to the victim and in part to the institution.
  • Criminal leaves prison with a marketable skill





  • You want energy, you need to bring it to the consumer.
  • Pipelines are a political football and that's it. The alts are truck, rail or bucket-brigade - you choose




Anthro GW or Climate Change is a crock. This is evidenced by the International bodies jockeying to 'tax' emitters under the guise that they will reduce all the while knowing that any reduction is impossible where your population is increasing.

Interestingly enough, the tax revenues go to pay for their bloated admin and select pay-offs to select countries that get 'developing nation' status.

If there is any question remaining about AGW, simply look to the accuracy of the predictions and models over the last 15 years... None of them have held any basis in reality.... That said, only a fool will blindly accept the 'facts' based on such a dismal record of failure






  • If you believe that AGW is baseless, then the above is not an issue.
  • If you are a dyed in the wool truther, then what is the technological alternative?
  • FYI - it's supposed to fall to -45 in Winnipeg today... How many solar panels and wind mills do they need to keep the pipes from freezing?




  • Carbon isn't pollution, it is the building block of all life on this planet
  • It absolutely boggles the mind that people can't see that this is just a tax based on a trendy, theoretical belief and nothing more.
  • Cost of living will go up proportionally to the tax and the demographic that will get nailed the worst is those the lowest part of the income scale.
  • All this does is raise the cost of living for everyone




Ask a BC resident how this zero-sum tax scheme is working out for them.



Nonsense. BC's industrial capacity has eroded big time over the last 20 years. The basis of the economy is squarely on foreign direct investment in the R/E sector




Give the land rights directly to the individuals and cut-out the archaic and corrupt FN gvts... Eliminate the Teressa Spence's of the world and this will be the first, biggest step to addressing this issue



A dramatic over reaction by the Globe and Mail influenced by the the death of that choir boy and wee angel Michael Brown



That is a losing argument with the presence of bleeding heart lefties that want to coddle and reward those that break the law



Smart idea

Heresy. Your Liberal membership card has been revoked for life.
 

Walter

Hall of Fame Member
Jan 28, 2007
34,843
92
48
Typical lefty opinion article telling us what we need to do.
 

gerryh

Time Out
Nov 21, 2004
25,756
295
83
Crime and punishment: This country avoided many of the mistakes of a U.S. justice system that is often brutal and counterproductive. But cases like those of Ashley Smith and Edward Snowshoe, whose difficult lives were worsened and ultimately ended by solitary confinement and misguided attempts at correction, should remind Canadians that our system is far from perfect, and may be getting worse.
Consider: A high percentage of the people behind bars have serious mental health issues. Is more punishment going to cure them? Is more or less treatment going to help?
Consider: Almost everyone who is behind bars is going to get out. Their sentences are not forever, and they will soon walk the same streets as you. They will soon be your neighbours. Would doing more to educate, treat and humanize them help them become good neighbours? Or would worsening their conditions of incarceration be more likely to produce peaceful, model citizens?
We need to have a rational conversation about this.


Agreed, our system is not perfect. That being said, I don't want to see it brought to the point of "coddling" those that have found themselves incarcerated. There's a reason they are in jail and it's not because they ran around handing out roses and chocolates.

Pipelines: Not every pipeline proposal deserves a green light. (This space has had reservations about the Northern Gateway project, for example.) But unless you’re planning on outlawing motor vehicles and shutting down the oil industry, you need to use and move oil. Pipe is generally the most efficient and safe way to do it. Thousands upon thousands of miles of pipe already criss-cross the continent. Ever more oil is being produced in both Canada and the U.S. – all of which has to be moved. Much of this new North American oil is displacing oil that is already moving by rail, or being imported by ship from across the ocean.
In parts of Canada, the discussion around all of this is sometimes detached from that reality. For example, Ontario and Quebec are not currently oil-free zones, in case anyone driving their Range Rover to an environmental protest needs to be reminded. New pipe from the West means replacing oil that has long arrived from overseas. And some of those ships bringing oil to Canada may soon reverse the flow, carrying Canadian oil across the sea from the same ports in Quebec and New Brunswick. All of this has to be done to the highest environmental standards. But Canada is not an oil virgin, and we can’t have any honest conversation if we pretend otherwise.


The highlighted says it all. It's not like Canada doesn't have very good existing rules and regulations concerning pipelines.




Climate change: The right is right about pipelines – but the left is correct about climate change. The thing is, it’s possible for Canada to have an oil industry, and pipelines, and to also take significant steps to reduce global warming. There’s no necessary contradiction. In fact, people on the right – see Preston Manning’s recent comments in support of carbon taxes – are starting to realize that caring about pollution shouldn’t be left to the left. It could easily be turned into a right-wing issue. Or – let us dream a little – a non-partisan issue.
We think British Columbia’s carbon tax, which involves taxing fuels like gasoline while equally lowering income and other taxes, is the way to go. It cut B.C.’s carbon emissions by much more than the national average even as B.C.’s economy grew faster than the national average.
The B.C. model is just one of many. But the basic idea of putting higher taxes on things we want less of, like pollution, and lowering taxes on things we want more of – income, investment, savings – is something Conservatives, Liberals, New Democrats and Greens should all be able to support.
After all, who’s in favour of raising taxes on income and lowering taxes on pollution? Anyone?


No left isn't completely correct. Unfortunately, they have decided anyone that does not agree with them 100% is a denier and not worth listening to. As evidenced by this very board.

Aboriginal Canada: This country needs an honest conversation about how to lift up native Canadians, so the average aboriginal Canadian enjoys the same standard of living as the average Canadian. That discussion will raise uncomfortable questions for federal and provincial governments. But it will also put unsettling questions to Canada’s native leadership, which sometimes acts as if the solution lies in moving native Canada back to the 15th century, and not forward into the 21st.


Buy out the treaties and let em go. Sink or swim. I'm tired of the bullshyte coming from the majority of them. I now understand why my Grandmother (who was full blood) and my Mother (who was half blood) were so set against "their people".


Policing: You cannot have law without police, but neither can you have police who are above the law, or a public perception that they might be. Any measures of greater police oversight– such as the wearing of body cameras by officers, as this page has called for – is not about punishing or undermining police officers. It is not about siding with criminals. It is about ensuring that everyone in society respects the law, especially those who are sworn to uphold it. That’s a good place to start a conversation.


Agreed.

I don't necessarily agree with the stand taken in the article for each issue but I will agree they are important issues that require rational discussion. Unfortunately, if this forum is any indication, rational discussion of these issues is a pipe dream.


With that attitude, I can't argue with you.
 

Scooby

Electoral Member
Mar 22, 2012
403
0
16
Alberta
I'm all for rational discussion, but the article seems to indicate that discussions will bring about some solutions to problems presented. None of these will be properly addressed without a seismic shift in our politics. They will remain or get worse, if PC's or Liberal's end up forming the next government. They won't fix any of them, they will pass the buck.
 

SLM

The Velvet Hammer
Mar 5, 2011
29,151
3
36
London, Ontario
Crime and punishment: This country avoided many of the mistakes of a U.S. justice system that is often brutal and counterproductive. But cases like those of Ashley Smith and Edward Snowshoe, whose difficult lives were worsened and ultimately ended by solitary confinement and misguided attempts at correction, should remind Canadians that our system is far from perfect, and may be getting worse.
Consider: A high percentage of the people behind bars have serious mental health issues. Is more punishment going to cure them? Is more or less treatment going to help?
Consider: Almost everyone who is behind bars is going to get out. Their sentences are not forever, and they will soon walk the same streets as you. They will soon be your neighbours. Would doing more to educate, treat and humanize them help them become good neighbours? Or would worsening their conditions of incarceration be more likely to produce peaceful, model citizens?
We need to have a rational conversation about this.
We need to provide proper mental health care to those who are truly suffering from mental health issues, and from many things I've read there is indeed a significant portion of the prison population that suffers from mental health issues. Incarceration alone is not going to solve any problems for these people,in many cases it just makes everything worse or they end up dead.

Rehabilitation is possible for some, I've known people that have been rehabilitated. Upon release they have not returned to a life of crime and have become contributing members of society. But not everyone can be. Child molesters have a high recidivism rate. I'd also say highly violent offender are less likely to be successfully rehabilitated. I'd like to see that become part of the assessment when it comes to determining sentencing. Incarceration is not just a means of punishment, it also serves to make society safer by removing a dangerous element from it. Individual victims and society as a whole should be more of a consideration.