As the CBC has reported, Prime Minister Stephen Harper has again shown his disregard for our democracy by asking the Governor General to prorogue Parliament in the middle of session.
While it's no doubt unlikely that we can change anything, at the time of this writing the GG hasn't yet publicly responded. So I suggest we all send GG Michaelle Jean a message expressing our outrage. The GG's e-mail address is info@gg.ca. If enough people weigh in with their opinions, there's a chance we might convince her to save this session of Parliament and force the government to be accountable to the people.
Here's the text of the message I sent the GG, feel free to use it as a template:
Dear Ms. Jean:
I've heard that Prime Minister Harper has again asked you to prorogue Parliament. As your response has not been publicly announced yet, I implore you to deny his request.
Proroguing Parliament is not in Canada's best interest. At stake is $1 billion in Employment Insurance increases which will die along with other very important legislation.
Perhaps more important is the question of whether Mr. Harper can be allowed to turn proroguing Parliament, something which should be seen as an extraordinary measure, into a common occurrence that allows a government to dodge accountability.
With motions passed in the House calling for a public inquiry into the Afghan detainee issue, and calling for the government to disclose all information it holds on this issue, allowing Mr. Harper to prorogue Parliament is to allow him an abuse of process.
Mr. Harper is demeaning our Parliamentary system by treating extraordinary measures like proroguing Parliament as mere tools of political gamesmanship. Under Mr. Harper, responsible government is a thing of the past. He has systematically undermined government accountability to Parliament.
What Canada needs most right now is an extraordinary Governor General who will put their foot down and protect the integrity of Parliament and Canada's democracy. Please do not grant Mr. Harper's request to prorogue Parliament.
Sincerely,
Mark Carter
There's also a Facebook group you can join for more information and opinions on this topic.
Wednesday, December 30, 2009
Saturday, December 26, 2009
Ontario college teachers set to go on strike
Ontario's college teachers are set to go on strike in January, and I can already hear it... students and their parents complaining (most likely to the workers who aren't the problem, rather than to management) that they're going to miss a semester, or have their semester extended into the summer vacation season if a strike goes on for too long. Letters to the editor will be written, Facebook groups will be created, all focused on the students' needs with no regard (or, likely, any knowledge) of what the workers are fighting for.
What students and parents who call for quick ends to labour disputes fail to understand is that they're sabotaging their own futures and those of their children.
How often is the lesson taught in colleges and universities that short-term thinking is the cause of so many seemingly intractable problems?
Yet students engage in this same short-term thinking when they're only concerned about finishing their semester on time and fail to look at the big picture.
If you don't support striking workers, you doom yourselves to a future where all that will be available to you is part-time work without benefits. You'll likely be low-paid, you'll have uncertain hours, and your working conditions will be poor. You'll be working two to three jobs to make ends meet.
Workers in all industries are fighting these same fights. Declines in working conditions spread from employer to employer far faster than gains made by workers. So, students need to learn this lesson now: United we bargain, divided we beg.
Your teachers' fight is your fight. They're protecting your future, so have the decency to support them.
For more details, click here, and/or visit the OPSEU site.
What students and parents who call for quick ends to labour disputes fail to understand is that they're sabotaging their own futures and those of their children.
How often is the lesson taught in colleges and universities that short-term thinking is the cause of so many seemingly intractable problems?
Yet students engage in this same short-term thinking when they're only concerned about finishing their semester on time and fail to look at the big picture.
If you don't support striking workers, you doom yourselves to a future where all that will be available to you is part-time work without benefits. You'll likely be low-paid, you'll have uncertain hours, and your working conditions will be poor. You'll be working two to three jobs to make ends meet.
Workers in all industries are fighting these same fights. Declines in working conditions spread from employer to employer far faster than gains made by workers. So, students need to learn this lesson now: United we bargain, divided we beg.
Your teachers' fight is your fight. They're protecting your future, so have the decency to support them.
For more details, click here, and/or visit the OPSEU site.
Sunday, December 20, 2009
Budgeting for Change
As we approach the end of the year, we're reaching the deadline to make charitable donations which can be deducted from this year's taxes. This can be problematic, because we're also at that time of year when many of us have spent lots of money on gifts for the holiday season. Tack on complications like high unemployment, and an increasing trend towards jobs being cut to part-time without benefits, and many of us are thinking twice about making charitable contributions. In many cases it's just not financially viable.
One solution is to integrate charity into our monthly budgets. Instead of trying to come up with unwieldy lump sums at the end of the year, why not spread your donations through the year by enrolling in the monthly pre-authorized giving programs most organizations now offer? The organization will appreciate a steady donation stream rather than relying on an uncertain once-a-year donation, and integrating $5-20 per month into your budget is probably a lot easier than trying to come up with an extra $200 at Christmas time. You may even be able to painlessly increase your donations by 20%... if you donate $50/year to an organization, for instance, converting that to $5/month increases your donation to $60.00.
Another option is to donate to a political party. There are two good reasons to consider this: first, political party contributions receive very favourable tax treatment; you'll get 75% of your donation back. Secondly, a political party that's successful (and success in politics is measured by more than how many seats are won in a legislature) has the power to influence the movement of huge sums of money and resources. When you empower an organization that actually has the power to make or influence change, it's like exponentially multiplying your donation.
For instance, if you believe in environmental issues, you can donate to environmental groups who will lobby for legislative changes, perhaps buy land for conservation, and so forth. Or, you can help a political party that shares your environmental values become successful. That party can actually introduce the legislation to make the changes you want, they can set aside vast swathes of land as protected parks space... even if they're not the party in power, they'll be able to get the message out, influence the final versions of legislation, introduce new legislation on their own, (hopefully) have their ideas stolen by those in power... all told, supporting a political party that shares your values is a pretty good strategy. Politics is all about the allocation of scarce resources, and it's always more effective to be working for change from the inside. Of course, this strategy works much better if you also make the effort to go out and vote for your chosen political party during an election!
So if you're feeling like you're stretched too thin financially to donate to causes you believe in at this time of year, consider a more structured approach to giving. Monthly contributions split the donation into easily manageable chunks, and converting some of your giving into a donation to a political party is more tax effective and potentially has a multiplier effect in the effectiveness of reaching the goals you support.
One solution is to integrate charity into our monthly budgets. Instead of trying to come up with unwieldy lump sums at the end of the year, why not spread your donations through the year by enrolling in the monthly pre-authorized giving programs most organizations now offer? The organization will appreciate a steady donation stream rather than relying on an uncertain once-a-year donation, and integrating $5-20 per month into your budget is probably a lot easier than trying to come up with an extra $200 at Christmas time. You may even be able to painlessly increase your donations by 20%... if you donate $50/year to an organization, for instance, converting that to $5/month increases your donation to $60.00.
Another option is to donate to a political party. There are two good reasons to consider this: first, political party contributions receive very favourable tax treatment; you'll get 75% of your donation back. Secondly, a political party that's successful (and success in politics is measured by more than how many seats are won in a legislature) has the power to influence the movement of huge sums of money and resources. When you empower an organization that actually has the power to make or influence change, it's like exponentially multiplying your donation.
For instance, if you believe in environmental issues, you can donate to environmental groups who will lobby for legislative changes, perhaps buy land for conservation, and so forth. Or, you can help a political party that shares your environmental values become successful. That party can actually introduce the legislation to make the changes you want, they can set aside vast swathes of land as protected parks space... even if they're not the party in power, they'll be able to get the message out, influence the final versions of legislation, introduce new legislation on their own, (hopefully) have their ideas stolen by those in power... all told, supporting a political party that shares your values is a pretty good strategy. Politics is all about the allocation of scarce resources, and it's always more effective to be working for change from the inside. Of course, this strategy works much better if you also make the effort to go out and vote for your chosen political party during an election!
So if you're feeling like you're stretched too thin financially to donate to causes you believe in at this time of year, consider a more structured approach to giving. Monthly contributions split the donation into easily manageable chunks, and converting some of your giving into a donation to a political party is more tax effective and potentially has a multiplier effect in the effectiveness of reaching the goals you support.
Tuesday, December 8, 2009
The Dark Side of Privatization
In 2003 the Conservative government in Ontario privatized driver's license testing centres. In exchange for a mere $114 million dollars, the government awarded Serco DES Inc. (of the UK; that's right, they not only privatized a public service, but they outsourced it to a foreign country) a 10-year exclusive contract to provide driver examination tests such as road tests (both passenger vehicle and transport trucks), vision tests, and written examinations.
In the press release issued at the time, then Transportation Minister Norm Sterling said that:
"With this transfer, we are committed to reducing test wait times to no more than six weeks everywhere in Ontario," said Sterling. "Customer service will be improved through innovative service delivery and the government will continue to diligently safeguard the public interest."In the same press release, then Finance Minister Janet Ecker said:
"Private-sector involvement in driver examination services will bring efficiency to service delivery, savings to taxpayers and will allow government to focus on what matters most to Ontarians - health care, education, the environment, and a climate for job creation."
As Serco DES Inc. employees across the province now enter their seventeenth week of strike action, let's examine whether the public interest has been served, and whether this privatization has facilitated a climate for job creation.
According to the press release, there were 750 MTO employees at the time of the privatization:
Staffing Implications
---------------------
Approximately 750 permanent and contract MTO employees are affected by the service transfer. Permanent employees may choose to transfer to Serco DES in accordance with their collective agreement. Staff who choose not to transfer will be entitled to severance packages as outlined by their collective agreement.
Seven hundred and fifty (750) government employees, most of which were full-time with benefits and pension plans. How many Serco DES employees are currently on strike? Well, after imposing a 15% pay cut and taking away their pensions, Serco DES has whittled down its workforce to about five hundred (500). However, they haven't stopped there. They've turned formerly good jobs into marginal employment: 50% of Serco DES employees are now part-time with no benefits, with no guaranteed number of hours each week, and Serco DES is seeking to convert more employees into part-timers.
So out of the original 750 good jobs, 250 have been lost entirely. Of the remaining 500, the company has marginalized 250. That means that only a third of the original jobs remain. So, did the Conservative government succeed in creating a climate for job creation? Clearly not. The privatization of driver testing in Ontario has decimated hundreds of jobs in the province.
Which brings us to the public interest. With hundreds of jobs eliminated and marginalized, the province and the communities where these workers work(ed) have seen a decline in tax revenues. Local economies will have seen a decline proportionate to the decline in spending power of these workers. The ripple effects of job loss and job marginalization in communities are widespread. Is that in the public interest? Hardly.
The government trumpeted reduced waiting times as a benefit of privatization. Well, due to the shoddy way Serco DES treats its employees, they now have a four month backlog of driver's license tests.
Worse, in trying to undermine the union by continuing to offer services by having unqualified managers performing the jobs of driver examiners, Serco DES is creating a burgeoning public safety issue. Striking workers have documented drivers' tests, for transport truck drivers, which have broken just about every rule in the book. Serco DES managers are awarding licences to drive transport trucks based on extremely sub-par drivers' tests which do not meet Ministry of Transportation standards. When one of these improperly tested drivers kills someone on the road, who will be held responsible?
So where is the Ministry of Transportation in all of this? When the privatization occurred, it was stated that the Ontario government would:
- monitor driver exam services to ensure they are delivered fairly and consistently across Ontario;
- continue to establish standards and set policy;
- continue to regulate fees for driver examination services;
- ensure legislative compliance;
- rigorously monitor and audit the new service provider's performance; and
- apply remedies if contract standards are not met.
Serco DES has collected testing fees for hundreds of thousands of backlogged drivers' tests. They're sitting on a massive war chest of taxpayers' money collected for services they haven't delivered. They're using this money to conduct a drawn-out siege against the union rather than returning to the bargaining table in good faith. In addition to enforcing the terms of the contract (which includes penalties for failing to meet service standards), the Ontario government should be seizing these test fee monies and holding them in escrow until service at DriveTest centres resumes.
Do you want to help make a difference? Don't cross the picket lines. Tell your 16-year-old that by supporting the striking USW 9511 DriveTest workers, they're fighting for their own future. We need to fight the marginalization of jobs everywhere, else there'll be no decent jobs in the future for today's teenagers who are having to wait to get their first driver's license.
Contact Jim Bradley, the Minister of Transportation, and demand that he take action against Serco DES for the deplorable way they've treated their workers and for failing to live up to the terms of their contract.
Contact Dalton McGuinty, Ontario's Premier, and tell him what a travesty this experiment in privatization of government services has become.
Tell Serco DES that their deplorable treatment of workers is not what Ontario taxpayers signed on for, and that their union-busting "Q&A Regarding Returning to Work During the Strike" is unethical and disgusting. Send a message to their employee.questions@drivetest.ca and CustomerComments@drivetest.ca addresses telling them that instead of encouraging workers to betray their union brothers and sisters by becoming scabs, that they should be returning to the bargaining table in good faith, and offering full-time jobs with benefits.
How much profit is enough? It's time that Serco DES acknowledged that they've crossed the line between profit-seeking and unethical profiteering at the expense of workers and the public.
Update: DriveTest employees ratified a new collective agreement on December 31st, 2009, after nineteen weeks of striking. Thank you to everyone who supported them! Please, remember these workers and the impact of privatization on DriveTest the next time you hear politicians speaking of privatizing public services! Make sure your voice is heard by voting in the next elections!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
