As the Super Tuesday results continue to trickle in, when it comes to politics I can’t help but find myself so much more interested in what is happening in the US than I am in that of my own country. Perhaps a minority situation and the constant talk of an election without actually having one has left me bored with our status quo. Perhaps the uniqueness of the Clinton-Obama affair is simply worth watching. Whatever the case, the outcome of the US race has undeniable implications for Canada. With McCain running away on the Republican side, and with Clinton or Obama headlining the Democratic ticket – there are already some clear issues that Canadians can take note of, irrespective of who wins the Presidency.
Each of the three frontrunners is committed to action on climate change, in developing comprehensive immigration reform, and in giving greater attention to the conflict in Afghanistan.
The Environment …
On the environment, when it comes to taking aggressive steps and joining international frameworks, the Harper government has been steadfast in Canada’s opposition to recommended action plans unless major developing country emitters (read: China & India) commit themselves as well. China and India, in turn, remain opposed as long as the world’s biggest polluter, the US, remains a holdout. Barring any major upset from Mitt Romney down south, the US position on this will be changing as soon as a non-Bush is sworn in next January. As for us – if the Con’s remain in power next year and the US/China/India all embark on a new path, the pressure to fall in line and adopt a major shift in policy will be huge, and if they don’t I can’t wait to hear the reason!
Migration …
2007 saw a surge in the number of Latin American migrants entering Canada from the US following failed immigration reforms coupled with changing national security laws. All three leading candidates have similar calls out for "comprehensive immigration reform" involving various pathways to citizenship/legality for the millions already living and working in the US in an undocumented manner. As we saw last year, however, there is enormous opposition to such reforms in both the House and the Senate. Granted Bush is having trouble getting much of anything done these - but if a new President with a decent approval rating tries to push it through and still fails, then we can surely expect to see far greater numbers of migrants crossing the 49th parallel than we already have to date.
Afghanistan …
The Manley Report has certainly re-energized the debate about Canada's role in Afghanistan. The Conservatives want to stay, but only if they can recruit additional troop support from our NATO allies. The Liberals want to stay, but only if the primary focus of the mission(s) shifts from combat to economic development and rebuilding efforts. Even though the Iraq debacle has been at the centre of the foriegn policy debate in the US, each of the leading candidates have made efforts to pledge greater attention and resources into Afghanistan. The problem for us is that we won't know what the specific nature of that support will look like until 2009 - possibly long after our MPs have voted on whether we'll stay or go. But as we are making these choices, I do wonder the extent to which a changing mood from Washington is considered by those voting on this delicate issue.
As for the actual Super Tuesday results - all predictions held true in that it's neck and neck for Democrats. Clinton & Obama - two well liked candidates each with oodles of cash to spend ... good luck sorting this one out anytime soon! I only hope that the nominee actually gets selected by primary voters, and it doesn't come down to superdelegates and the backrooms of a brokered convention. But that would make for some good television:)
Wednesday, 6 February 2008
Thursday, 10 January 2008
A Toronto Food Strategy
Beginning with the January 15th meeting of the Downtown Toronto & East York Local Health Committee, I will begin to be involved with discussions about the types of things that might feed into an official City of Toronto Food Strategy.
The idea would be to develop a strategy that (a) can be implemented, and (b) considers the following criteria:
- Improves health
- Is better for the environment
- Promotes economic development
- Promotes social justice
While I will be coming at this from a public health/safety perspective, food quality/cost/availability is something that we all have a stake in, and any good public policy will certainly grow alongside the views of many sectors.
This is also one of those things that has the potential to generate a wide variety of opinions. If any of you have questions, ideas, concerns, etc that would be relevant for us to consider, I would love to hear about it and welcome all comments - so please feel free to clog up my inbox!
The idea would be to develop a strategy that (a) can be implemented, and (b) considers the following criteria:
- Improves health
- Is better for the environment
- Promotes economic development
- Promotes social justice
While I will be coming at this from a public health/safety perspective, food quality/cost/availability is something that we all have a stake in, and any good public policy will certainly grow alongside the views of many sectors.
This is also one of those things that has the potential to generate a wide variety of opinions. If any of you have questions, ideas, concerns, etc that would be relevant for us to consider, I would love to hear about it and welcome all comments - so please feel free to clog up my inbox!
Friday, 16 November 2007
Black-focused schools: What do you think?
In response to disproportionately high dropout rates and poor academic performance among black youth, the Toronto District School Board (TDSB) is debating the idea of piloting an "Afrocentric" school.
My initial reaction is to oppose the plan. This is a serious and complicated problem that the TDSB should be working hard to do something about. But to frame this issue strictly as a failure of the education system somewhat misses the point, as it deflects attention away from the broader social issues at the heart of why so many of these kids do not succeed.
Poverty, stable housing, food security, knowledge of risk behaviours, access to healthcare and key services - the "social determinants" per se, or the indicators of socioeconomic status which are all linked to educational performance by a vast body of evidence. It might not come as a surprise that these are also among the chief determinants of health, as well as crime.
The 13 "priority neighbourhoods" as identified by the City of Toronto and major stakeholders (e.g. United Way) were acknowledged for being grossly underserved urban areas requiring a greater investment of resources. These communities also have a few other things in common, such as:
- High percentage of low income earners
- High percentage of low income single parent families (that single parent is usually a woman)
- Poor access to health and social services
- High rates of Homelessness
- High rates of Type 2 Diabetes
- High rates of Tobacco use
- High rates of school drop out
- High concentration of Afro-Canadian residents
Even if we were to achieve the best and most engaging schools in the world, I am inclined to think the overall improvements would be limited. Unless there is a strong effort underway to address the underlying socioeconomic determinants affecting these communities, too many kids will fail to meet their academic potential and decide that the classroom isn't for them.
Now these are just my early thoughts on the subject based on some reading and experience with underserved youth ... It's a tough issue to be confident with though, and I am still trying to talk it through with anyone I can to help firm up my position. Publicly or privately, I'd love to hear your thoughts if you care to weigh in.
My initial reaction is to oppose the plan. This is a serious and complicated problem that the TDSB should be working hard to do something about. But to frame this issue strictly as a failure of the education system somewhat misses the point, as it deflects attention away from the broader social issues at the heart of why so many of these kids do not succeed.
Poverty, stable housing, food security, knowledge of risk behaviours, access to healthcare and key services - the "social determinants" per se, or the indicators of socioeconomic status which are all linked to educational performance by a vast body of evidence. It might not come as a surprise that these are also among the chief determinants of health, as well as crime.
The 13 "priority neighbourhoods" as identified by the City of Toronto and major stakeholders (e.g. United Way) were acknowledged for being grossly underserved urban areas requiring a greater investment of resources. These communities also have a few other things in common, such as:
- High percentage of low income earners
- High percentage of low income single parent families (that single parent is usually a woman)
- Poor access to health and social services
- High rates of Homelessness
- High rates of Type 2 Diabetes
- High rates of Tobacco use
- High rates of school drop out
- High concentration of Afro-Canadian residents
Even if we were to achieve the best and most engaging schools in the world, I am inclined to think the overall improvements would be limited. Unless there is a strong effort underway to address the underlying socioeconomic determinants affecting these communities, too many kids will fail to meet their academic potential and decide that the classroom isn't for them.
Now these are just my early thoughts on the subject based on some reading and experience with underserved youth ... It's a tough issue to be confident with though, and I am still trying to talk it through with anyone I can to help firm up my position. Publicly or privately, I'd love to hear your thoughts if you care to weigh in.
Monday, 12 November 2007
Tax Cuts: Not all will feel the benefit
An anecdote from today’s Toronto issue of Metro News regarding the Federal Government’s announced “Mini-Budget”...
When asked about the Finance Minister’s statement that “these tax cuts will move some 385,000 people off the income tax rolls altogether,” Don Drummond, Chief Economist for TD Canada Trust, responded as follows:
“Don’t get sucked in by that … the low-income earners he refers to will hardly feel a benefit at all … Most of those people were only paying $5-10.”
When asked about the Finance Minister’s statement that “these tax cuts will move some 385,000 people off the income tax rolls altogether,” Don Drummond, Chief Economist for TD Canada Trust, responded as follows:
“Don’t get sucked in by that … the low-income earners he refers to will hardly feel a benefit at all … Most of those people were only paying $5-10.”
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)