"Canada Loses Ground"

Well well well, Canada is ranked 1 of the 17 wealthiest countries in socio-economic evaluations according to the Conference Board of Canada, today. They gave Canada four Bs — for economy, education, health and the social environment — but only a C on environment and a D on innovation. The board gives a B to countries in the second quartile, a C in the third and a D in the bottom. I for one am glad they got such a relegated mark, it is asinine to think that Canada’s progress on the environment and innovation is anymore improved than the Neolithic Age where agriculture, hunting tools, the invention of the wheel, sought positive changes in civilization as we know it. Today such truths were revealed, the environment with all the policies out there, volumes stacked in parliament cannot justify internal preference of socio-economic development over the environment or innovation for that matter. Canada has not legally enforced the Clean Air Act nationwide, and stepped away from Kyoto despite their international obligations, and proof that greener innovative technologies lead to a better country. Why is this the case? Well, the plot thickens, it appears that the Western Oil/Gas industries in Canada, the 2^nd largest oil industry in the world plays the favourtism card. Simply put, Canada will not bankrupt itself by developing greener technologies or enforcing national air quality standards for the sake of Canadians, but moreso for the sake of monetary justifications, Canada ranked in socio-economic evaluations of being 1 out of 17 wealthiest countries proves this theory.

Canada ranked No. 2 in education because high school and college graduation rates are very high. But there are problems, including the 40 per cent of adults who have trouble coping with the literacy and numeracy demands of life and work. Also, just their graduation analysis does not measure their level of success or life achievements, from my highschool in my hometown of Mississauga, only 25% of the grade 12s graduated but the figures were renumerated with the cohort figures so the absent students were replaced with those who cohorted.

Canada needs to subsidize its own GDP and place funds into the environment, education and innovation; without internal political malfeasance.

Yours Truly,

-Waterloo University: Alex.C, PSCI-260

CBC Canada, 2008

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/toronto/story/2008/06/27/canada-report.html?re

The Canadian Environment: A Land in Peril

In 2004, the Organisation of Economic Cooperation and Development ranked Canada 28th out of 30 G8 nations as the most sustainable, this notion competed thought to greener policies such as the Clean Air Act, the possible renewal of the 10-year contract of the Great Lakes Binational Toxic Strategy's toxic substance efforts in mediating contaminates from the joint US-Canada coalition. Of course the "10 years of Strategy Progress and Ambient Environmental Monitoring" of reducing Level 1 Toxic Substances such as PolyChlorinated Biphenyls, Mercury and Dioxin/Furnas along with 10 years worth of salaries, environmental remediation projects worth millions of dollars was placed in vain this very day.

Today, CBC reports that "16 Canadian lakes are slated to be officially but quietly "reclassified" as toxic dump sites for mines. The lakes include prime wilderness fishing lakes from B.C. to Newfoundland." The legal premise for this under the Fisheries Act interpreted as the tailings impoundment areas as justifiable mining effluent regulations that is exercisable under this precedence. What does this mean? It basically allocates harmful waste into protective marine outlets away from harmsway, despite where that allocation may be, even nature itself. This precedence places pollution-ridden corporations as an active weapon against the Canadian environment, for future generations.

So is the Canadian Environment in peril? The answer is yes.

Yours Truly,

-Waterloo University: Alex.C, PSCI-260

Canadian Gazette (2006). ”Clean Air Act.” Government of Canada, Vol. 140, No. 42: October 21, 2006, pg. 9‐34

CBC News, 2008
http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2008/06/16/condemned-lakes.html

Köhler, N. (2008). “A Nation of Eco‐Hogs?” Maclean Magazine, Apr. 16, pg. 1

USEPA, Great Lakes Pollution Prevention and Toxics Reduction
http://www.epa.gov/bns/

USEPA, 10th Year GLBTS Anniversary
http://www.epa.gov/bns/10thann/wg_for_sf_05-23-07.pdf

Step Forward: Canada apology for native schools

Today Canada apologized to Native Aboriginals in Canada for forcing 150,000 children to attend a state-funded Christian school while assimilating them to Canadian culture. I can only say that the Canadian Government is politically smart in this move. This was publicized internationally, admitting to mistakes of forcing acculturation of different ethnicities with traditions and ethics. Unlike many other administrations such as the United States, the admittance to error is never acknowledged but exacerbated through additional political woes, deceit and deaths, a good example would be the "War in Iraq." However, the political hypocrisies of the U.S. can be discussed at infinite lengths. Canada's acknowledgment and apology of forcing assimilation of cultures to Aboriginals was quite notable. Why? Pierre Elliott Trudeau was believed to be a pioneer in establishing a Canadian policy of multiculturalism known as the 1969 White Paper. This prevented Aboriginal policies and land right claims from further political continuity. In 1970, Aboriginals came up the the policy called the Red Papers, it was a mockery of the White Paper legality by affirming the complete opposite of what Aboriginal delegation was sought by Ottawa.
But today was that milestone between this literal duel-thought of what is politically right and wrong, Mr. Stephen Harper reaffirmed the coherency of multiculturalism and the right under the Canadian Constitution Act of 1982 for the Canadian Government to have Fiduciary Rights to Aboriginals, undeniable in legitimization of wrongful past acts, and that was witnessed by the international community. This can be seen as a step-forward, instead of political denial sought by our southern counter-parts. From now on, any Canadian Governmental malfeasant will be seen with an international address by the P.M. inaugurating an apology to the community inflicted.

Yours Truly,

-Waterloo University: Alex.C, PSCI-260

Canada in the Making,
http://www.canadiana.org/citm/themes/aboriginals/aboriginals12_e.html

BBC News, 2008
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7447811.stm

Comic Strip Appropriation: McGuinty, Charest team up on feds

Today the Canadian government led on another spectacle on climate change with hypocritical comments on improving the state of environmental affairs. The Ontario and Quebec Premiers: McGuinty and Charest are used as anecdotes to any morsel of intelligent thought, by promoting the cap-and-trade plan to lower carbon emissions...after Canada failed to meet the Kyoto Protocol targets in 2006. Of course, failed political economies exist only to the mere thought of the industrial complex? Yes, Rona Ambrose who was the Minister of the Environment at that time claimed to develop new ways to tackle on climate change, no concrete idea or thought has surfaced. The simple reason is that Canada is an Oil/Gas powerhouse recognized internationally, and by enacting a Clean Air Act, it would conflict with the Canadian economy and these politicians are aware that if unemployment rates are high in Canada, the public will vote for new politicians to take their place. This notion places internal affairs first, rather than the public right. Their words speak for themselves,"The federal government has the power to sign treaties, they do not have the power to commit us in our areas of jurisdiction." Charest said in today's article.

Under Parliament, the Canadian Environmental Protection Act 1999, Federal-Provincial jurisdictions are imbued to enact effective environmental laws, but yet these options are not exercised. A national law on Clean Air enforceable by Cabinet must be proposed in the Canadian Gazette I, II, & III and distributed amongst industries to adequately address any feasibility issues when this law is registered. This will actually "move the ball forward," instead of Premier McGuinty making that same remark, but without merit.

Yours Truly,

-Waterloo University: Alex.C, PSCI-260

The Toronto Star, 2008 http://www.thestar.com/News/Canada/article/435881

CBC Canada, 2006 http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/kyoto/timeline.html

Justice Department of Canada, http://laws.justice.gc.ca/en/const/c1867_e.html#provincial