Yes I'm busy and did not have blogging on my list, but a late evening scan of the days headlines prompts a quick and rough analysis, if nothing more to put on the record my own analysis of the ongoing silliness that masquerades as serious politics. You see, Mr. Ignatieff today called for the firing of Finance Minister Flaherty and seems to be threatening a federal election. My own sense is it is a bluff and he is counting on the NDP and Bloc self-interest to save him from himself, and he is hoping to (a) try to attack the Conservative advantage in the polls as better economic managers and (b) overcome the NDP attack of the Liberals having propped up the Conservatives by forcing the "prop the government" shoe onto the other opposition foot.
A few thoughts to put this all into perspective....
- There is a lot of rhetoric about this being the worst recession since 1929. I differ and I think most Canadians do too. If we take the misery index (add together the unemployment and inflation rates), which is what hits the pocketbooks of ordinary consumers, we are better off today than we were even in the early nineties and much better off than the early eighties. I realize that times are tough and there are many who have lost their jobs, but I think most people recognize that comparisons to 1929 are more rhetoric than real, at least as the economy is impacting the daily lives of ordinary Canadians.
- The poll numbers for the Liberals are based mainly on the Conservative free fall in Quebec, however the Bloc continues to do well there. Which means in practice that subtract up to 10 Quebec seats for the Conservatives, divide them between the Bloc and Liberals, and swap a few seats elsewhere in the country, and we still end up with a Conservative minority. If it is a reduced minority, it may make life more challenging for Stephen Harper in his own party but that is about the only thing that will change - not sure most Canadians think that is reason enough to go to the polls in the midst of an economic recession. I am thinking the party that is foolish enough to be seen to prompt an election at this time is a party that will be punished. Assuming that the leaders and strategist of all parties are reasonably smart people with instincts for self-preservation, there will be no election this spring, rhetoric not withstanding.
- I find the arguments raised against the government quite confusing. The government is criticised for not being more generous with EI (which would cost more money) and not getting out the stimulus fast enough(which would cost more money) but also for running a record deficit. HuH? Canadians may not pay attention to Question Period and the inconsistencies in argument there, but not sure you can get away with that in an election campaign.
Bottom line is that as long as the Bloc runs in Quebec and takes at least 50 seats, it means that a majority government means winning 155 out of 253 seats (61%) of the available seats for the other parties. Give the NDP their safe 20 and it means the Liberals and Conservatives (the only two parties vying for government) need to win a full 2/3 of the available seats in order to achieve a majority. Given the Conservative strength in the west, the Liberals in the 416 area code, it will take a near statistical fluke or total collapse before either party achieves a majority. My guess is that Bloc and NDP MPs have this all figured out and especially those MPs elected for the first time in June 2004, will be wondering why prompt an election at this time which is unlikely to change much, and will risk their seat and their entitlement to a pension at age 55 which comes after six years of service. I continue to hold that common sense suggests the election will not come til next year, and then for this reason, after June of 2010.
I notice on another blog the argument that Jim Flaherty was wrong on his budget numbers, as was Don Drummond and virtually every other economist. Pundits notwithstanding, I don't think Canadians are paying attention to the estimates and daily nattering about who said what when. The Conservatives still have the numbers in their favour as better economic managers and given the circumstances, that will be enough to prevent an election.
But this is politics, and the reasonable doesn't always prevail. That is, I suppose, what makes it so interesting and fun to watch.
Time to get back to work.....
Wednesday, 27 May, 2009
Tuesday, 26 May, 2009
Dr. VanPelt at the Humanities Congress
from Canada newswire this morning....
Congress of the Humanities and Social Sciences features provocative speakers and thoughtful research
OTTAWA, May 26 /CNW Telbec/ - This week Ottawa is the ideas capital of
the world as thousands of Canada's best minds converge at Congress 2009.
What's on - Tuesday, May 26
Research briefings for the media:
--------------------------------
Location: Paterson Hall, Room 302 at 9:30 (Carleton University)
- A new research of parents who are sending their kids to private schools
could help governments strengthen the public system. Thousands of
parents who can't afford to send their children to private schools
could benefit. Redeemer University College professor, Deani Van Pelt
will release data from research titled "The Most Effective Schools in
Ontario?"
Congress of the Humanities and Social Sciences features provocative speakers and thoughtful research
OTTAWA, May 26 /CNW Telbec/ - This week Ottawa is the ideas capital of
the world as thousands of Canada's best minds converge at Congress 2009.
What's on - Tuesday, May 26
Research briefings for the media:
--------------------------------
Location: Paterson Hall, Room 302 at 9:30 (Carleton University)
- A new research of parents who are sending their kids to private schools
could help governments strengthen the public system. Thousands of
parents who can't afford to send their children to private schools
could benefit. Redeemer University College professor, Deani Van Pelt
will release data from research titled "The Most Effective Schools in
Ontario?"
Monday, 25 May, 2009
Hiatus - back in mid June
It wasn't the plan, but between several major work projects that are consuming my attention, in addition to preparing for an upcoming Redeemer board of Directors meeting and next weeks meeting of the Free Reformed Church Synod, blogging has simply fallen off the priority list.
So rather than having you check back in vain on a regular basis, this space is going to take a hiatus for a few weeks (unless something major happens and the urge to blog becomes irresistible).
Check back in mid June.
So rather than having you check back in vain on a regular basis, this space is going to take a hiatus for a few weeks (unless something major happens and the urge to blog becomes irresistible).
Check back in mid June.
Tuesday, 19 May, 2009
Book Launch - Ottawa
Over the past few months, I have had a few opportunities to meet Patrick McCloskey who among his accomplishments, has just published a book on Catholic school in inner city of Harlem. Entitled, The Street Stops Here, the book provides an insiders look at the impact of an approach to education that takes seriously faith and its presuppositions for students that are for the most part disadvantaged and do not come from that faith tradition.
Patrick forwarded to me an invitation to a launch event being held this Wednesday in Ottawa, and since it suggested that I pass it on to those who I thought might be interested, I am doing so via this posting. Congratulations on your book , Patrick, and although I can't be in Ottawa on Wednesday, I hope your event goes well.
You are cordially invited to the launch of
The Street Stops Here:
A Year at a Catholic High School in Harlem
by
Patrick J. McCloskey
Wednesday, May 20, 2009, 7:00 to 9:00 p.m.
Nicholas Hoare bookstore
419 Sussex Drive
(diagonally across from The National Art Gallery)
The evening will focus on a public conversation about how the lessons of successfully education disadvantaged and mostly non-Catholic students in Harlem apply to educating at-risk students in Canada.
Anyone who questions the value of a good Catholic school education must read
Patrick J. McCloskey’s “The Street Stops Here”…Mr. McCloskey’s heartfelt eyewitness account of his year at Rice High School is accompanied by keen analysis that echoes the conclusions of academic experts. New York Times
“Powerful, eloquent, candid, McCloskey’s account should be required reading for those who seek to remedy the academic woes of our troubled urban schools.”
Publisher's Weekly
“[The Street Stops Here]...should be required reading for anyone who is interested in the welfare of our kids.” The Wall Street Journal
“[E]xtraordinary …compelling…. More than in any other book on Catholic education, McCloskey lets us see exactly how dedicated, underpaid educators doing the right thing in the classroom and in an atmosphere of mutual respect and order can transform the lives of at-risk African-American boys.” City Journal
“The real accomplishment of McCloskey's work, though, is setting forth a primer for urban school districts and raising questions about the sacrifices it takes to turn around struggling institutions… Although not every innovation can be applied at traditional public schools, the book is something educators and education reformers should cling to and study….”
San Francisco Chronicle
“McCloskey undertook a non-ideological inquiry to see what makes one inner-city, underfunded Catholic school successful…The unadorned narrative is convincing in its portrayal of Rice's mission to put an education, not a creed, into young men's heads.” Kirkus Reviews
“If President Obama…wants to know "what works for kids," particularly students on the social margins, he should pick up The Street Stops Here.” Weekly Standard
“McCloskey’s candid and vividly told book…takes us into the no-frills classrooms of Rice High School and shines a bright light onto the world of an all-boys school and urban parochial education.” Columbia Magazine
“Hollywood should grab this plot and ensure Denzel Washington gets the lead role.”
Ottawa Citizen
Patrick forwarded to me an invitation to a launch event being held this Wednesday in Ottawa, and since it suggested that I pass it on to those who I thought might be interested, I am doing so via this posting. Congratulations on your book , Patrick, and although I can't be in Ottawa on Wednesday, I hope your event goes well.
You are cordially invited to the launch of
The Street Stops Here:
A Year at a Catholic High School in Harlem
by
Patrick J. McCloskey
Wednesday, May 20, 2009, 7:00 to 9:00 p.m.
Nicholas Hoare bookstore
419 Sussex Drive
(diagonally across from The National Art Gallery)
The evening will focus on a public conversation about how the lessons of successfully education disadvantaged and mostly non-Catholic students in Harlem apply to educating at-risk students in Canada.
Anyone who questions the value of a good Catholic school education must read
Patrick J. McCloskey’s “The Street Stops Here”…Mr. McCloskey’s heartfelt eyewitness account of his year at Rice High School is accompanied by keen analysis that echoes the conclusions of academic experts. New York Times
“Powerful, eloquent, candid, McCloskey’s account should be required reading for those who seek to remedy the academic woes of our troubled urban schools.”
Publisher's Weekly
“[The Street Stops Here]...should be required reading for anyone who is interested in the welfare of our kids.” The Wall Street Journal
“[E]xtraordinary …compelling…. More than in any other book on Catholic education, McCloskey lets us see exactly how dedicated, underpaid educators doing the right thing in the classroom and in an atmosphere of mutual respect and order can transform the lives of at-risk African-American boys.” City Journal
“The real accomplishment of McCloskey's work, though, is setting forth a primer for urban school districts and raising questions about the sacrifices it takes to turn around struggling institutions… Although not every innovation can be applied at traditional public schools, the book is something educators and education reformers should cling to and study….”
San Francisco Chronicle
“McCloskey undertook a non-ideological inquiry to see what makes one inner-city, underfunded Catholic school successful…The unadorned narrative is convincing in its portrayal of Rice's mission to put an education, not a creed, into young men's heads.” Kirkus Reviews
“If President Obama…wants to know "what works for kids," particularly students on the social margins, he should pick up The Street Stops Here.” Weekly Standard
“McCloskey’s candid and vividly told book…takes us into the no-frills classrooms of Rice High School and shines a bright light onto the world of an all-boys school and urban parochial education.” Columbia Magazine
“Hollywood should grab this plot and ensure Denzel Washington gets the lead role.”
Ottawa Citizen
Monday, 18 May, 2009
Holiday Reading
It's Victoria Day, a holiday in Canada -- usually a day on which we do our flowerbeds but with a cold miserable day here in Calgary, I'm turning it into a lazy afternoon of reading.
I've picked up John Piper's God's Passion for His Glory, which includes a reprint of Jonathan Edwards The End for which God Created the World.
In defending the reprint of a difficult and few-centuries old manuscript, Piper includes a familiar quote from CS Lewis which I think is wise counsel:
I've picked up John Piper's God's Passion for His Glory, which includes a reprint of Jonathan Edwards The End for which God Created the World.
In defending the reprint of a difficult and few-centuries old manuscript, Piper includes a familiar quote from CS Lewis which I think is wise counsel:
It is a good rule, after reading a new book, never to allow yourself another new one until you have read an old one between....We all ... need the books that will correct the characteristic mistakes of our own period. And that means the old books.... We must be sure that the characteristic blindness of the twentieth century... lies where we have never suspected it... None of us fully escape this blindness.... The only palliative is to keep the clean sea breeze of the centuries blowing through our minds, and this can only be done by reading old books.
Saturday, 16 May, 2009
The Walkman Turns 30
Arts and Letters Daily drew my attention to a British on-line article commenting on the impact on the walkman, the predecessor to the seemingly everywhere present ipod of our day. In the interests of full disclosure, I must admit to having my first walkman at least 25 years ago -- enabling me to listen to the radio or cassette tapes during the three hours of school bus rides that I experienced in my school days -- and my current ipod contains some 509 songs / speeches (which is turned over every few months to give me fresh listening options.) Hence, this criticism is reflective, not judgmental towards others, given that I am as guilty as anyone.
The article highlights both the loss of hearing and loss of the shared musical experiences as two reasons why we'd be happier if walkmans and their proteges had never been invented. I would add a third - a loss of social engagement.
For me, the experience usually comes on an airplane but it is observable in various social settings. A group of individuals in close proximity for an extended period of time, who come and go without as much as a exchanging a pleasantry. Now I will confess to having participated in enough conversations with self-centered buffoons over the years to welcome the escape that the ipod offers me -- not all conversation with strangers is worth the time it takes. But I also realize that by avoiding these less than pleasant conversations, I am also deprived of the many other very interesting conversations with strangers that were more commonplace in my experience a decade ago than today. A conversation with a stranger is increasingly rare, and with it, our understanding of the richness and diversity of human experience is lessened. And yes, I do think the ever-present ipod is at least partly to blame.
Not only does the ipod lessen the opportunity for such encounters, but our lack of practice means that we are (or at least I am) finding ourselves less skilled at engaging in conversation with strangers that discovers those areas of shared interest or learning that we can offer each other. I have chatted with authors; listened to parents and grandparents tell proud stories of their offsprings accomplishments; discussed history, current affairs, sports, and God with many strangers on airplanes, in coffeeshops, and elevators. The more memorable conversations that come to mind as I write this, however, are almost all several years old.
It was not until I just read this article this morning that I made the link consciously that the tools that keep me plugged in to the music, lectures, and sermons of my choice is the same tool that keeps my neighbour plugged out of my world. When I have a headset on (I detest the earbuds ), I am unapproachable. And given the prevalance of the ipod, even if I want to change and be approachable, most of my neighbours are no longer approachable and since it takes two to have a conversation, the opportunities are greatly reduced.
One fears that thirty years of this social ipodization has not only reduced the opporutunity for conversation, but also has reduced our skills in making or maintaining such conversation. I took four airplane rides this week and as is my custom, tried to initiate small talk with my neighbours during the regulatory non-ipod time of takeoff and landing. This week was no exception to the recent trend -- it is rare to find those who are willing to open themselves up at all to conversation. It is not that they were unpleasant or seemed opposed to my questions, but continued one-word answers to open-ended questions makes for short conversation.
This doesn't mean I regret the birth of personal listening devices -- they make my life much more pleasant and productive and are an instrument for good. It is simply to recognize that in the fallen world we inhabit, good things also have bad consequences and the decline of conversation and neighbourliness (which results in more loneliness and isolation) is one of those negative consequences.
The article highlights both the loss of hearing and loss of the shared musical experiences as two reasons why we'd be happier if walkmans and their proteges had never been invented. I would add a third - a loss of social engagement.
For me, the experience usually comes on an airplane but it is observable in various social settings. A group of individuals in close proximity for an extended period of time, who come and go without as much as a exchanging a pleasantry. Now I will confess to having participated in enough conversations with self-centered buffoons over the years to welcome the escape that the ipod offers me -- not all conversation with strangers is worth the time it takes. But I also realize that by avoiding these less than pleasant conversations, I am also deprived of the many other very interesting conversations with strangers that were more commonplace in my experience a decade ago than today. A conversation with a stranger is increasingly rare, and with it, our understanding of the richness and diversity of human experience is lessened. And yes, I do think the ever-present ipod is at least partly to blame.
Not only does the ipod lessen the opportunity for such encounters, but our lack of practice means that we are (or at least I am) finding ourselves less skilled at engaging in conversation with strangers that discovers those areas of shared interest or learning that we can offer each other. I have chatted with authors; listened to parents and grandparents tell proud stories of their offsprings accomplishments; discussed history, current affairs, sports, and God with many strangers on airplanes, in coffeeshops, and elevators. The more memorable conversations that come to mind as I write this, however, are almost all several years old.
It was not until I just read this article this morning that I made the link consciously that the tools that keep me plugged in to the music, lectures, and sermons of my choice is the same tool that keeps my neighbour plugged out of my world. When I have a headset on (I detest the earbuds ), I am unapproachable. And given the prevalance of the ipod, even if I want to change and be approachable, most of my neighbours are no longer approachable and since it takes two to have a conversation, the opportunities are greatly reduced.
One fears that thirty years of this social ipodization has not only reduced the opporutunity for conversation, but also has reduced our skills in making or maintaining such conversation. I took four airplane rides this week and as is my custom, tried to initiate small talk with my neighbours during the regulatory non-ipod time of takeoff and landing. This week was no exception to the recent trend -- it is rare to find those who are willing to open themselves up at all to conversation. It is not that they were unpleasant or seemed opposed to my questions, but continued one-word answers to open-ended questions makes for short conversation.
This doesn't mean I regret the birth of personal listening devices -- they make my life much more pleasant and productive and are an instrument for good. It is simply to recognize that in the fallen world we inhabit, good things also have bad consequences and the decline of conversation and neighbourliness (which results in more loneliness and isolation) is one of those negative consequences.
Friday, 15 May, 2009
Calgary City Soul
My colleague, Michael VanPelt, has an op-ed in today's Calgary Herald , in which he highlights the relative neglect of the role of faith institutions in the official plan of the city.
I have previously blogged on Cardus' efforts on this project -- we are continuing to do development work on this project and hopefully will be in a position to do more work on this project shortly.
I have previously blogged on Cardus' efforts on this project -- we are continuing to do development work on this project and hopefully will be in a position to do more work on this project shortly.
Thursday, 14 May, 2009
The Lasting Significance of 1989
Over a "get-acquainted" lunch today, my companions and I engaged in one of those wide-ranging "analyze world hisotry, contemporary politics, and what your currently working on" discussions. An interesting point was raised that a significant change occurred in western societies in the past few decades. Might it be, we wondered, that the lasting impact of the fall of the Berlin Wall (and what it signified) may have more to do with domestic than international affairs? Prior to 1989, whatever domestic differences we had could be put into the context of "we're on the same team over against enemies which threaten our way of life." Once the enemy disappeared, that explanation no longer held water and we had to begin dealing with our differences and figure out what it was that we really had in common and that holds our societies together. Turns out that was a tougher question than some expected, and we're still struggling to answer it. Worth pondering....
Wednesday, 13 May, 2009
Congratulations Gideon
My good friend and long-time colleague has been appointed as the President of Citizens for Public Justice in Washington, DC, to commence October 1,2009. We look forward to contributions from this new post, as well as your continued contribution as a Senior Fellow with Cardus.
Tuesday, 12 May, 2009
Hiatus....
These are fascinating days for Canadian political junkies with the Dhalla hearings, the Mulroney appearance, and the release of Conservative attack ads. Unfortunately for me, my work plate is overflowing and blogging is going to have take a hiatus for a few days. Check back towards the weekend.....
Saturday, 9 May, 2009
Happy Mothers Day
courtesy of one of those email forwards, which generally annoy me and cause me to hit the delete button, but today included something worth republishing....
A woman, renewing her driver's license at the County Clerk 's office, was asked by the woman recorder to state her occupation. She hesitated, uncertain how to classify herself.
'What I mean is, ' explained the recorder,
'do you have a job or are you just a ..?'
'Of course I have a job,' snapped the woman.
'I'm a Mom.'
'We don't list 'Mom' as an occupation,'housewife' covers it,'
Said the recorder emphatically.
I forgot all about her story until one day I found myself in the same situation, this time at our own Town Hall.
The Clerk was obviously a career woman, poised,
Efficient, and possessed of a high sounding title like,
'Official Interrogator' or 'Town Registrar.'
'What is your occupation?' she probed.
What made me say it? I do not know. The words simply popped out.
'I'm a Research Associate in the field of Child Development and Human Relations.'
The clerk paused, ball-point pen frozen in midair and looked up as though she had not heard right. I repeated the title slowly emphasizing the most significant words.
Then I stared with wonder as my pronouncement was written, in bold, black ink on the official questionnaire.
'Might I ask,' said the clerk with new interest,
'just what you do in your field?'
Coolly, without any trace of fluster in my voice,I heard myself reply, 'I have a continuing program of research, (what mother doesn't) in the laboratory and in the field, (normally I would have said indoors and out). I'm working for my Masters, (first the Lord and then the whole family) and already have four credits (all daughters). Of course, the job is one of the most demanding in the humanities,(any mother care to disagree?) and I often work 14 hours a day, (24 is more like it).
But the job is more challenging than most run-of-the-mill careers and the rewards are more of a satisfaction rather than just money.'
There was an increasing note of respect in the clerk's voice as she completed the form, stood up, and personally ushered me to the door.
As I drove into our driveway, buoyed up by my glamorous new career, I was greeted by my lab assistants -- ages 13, 7, and 3.
Upstairs I could hear our new experimental model, (a 6 month old baby) in the child development program, testing out a new vocal pattern.
I felt I had scored a beat on bureaucracy! And I had gone on the official records as someone more distinguished and indispensable to mankind than 'just another Mom.'
Motherhood! What a glorious career!
Especially when there's a title on the door.
Does this make grandmothers 'Senior Research associates in the field of Child Development and Human Relations'? And great grandmothers 'Executive Senior Research Associates?' I think so!!!
I also think it makes Aunts 'Associate Research Assistants.'
Please say Happy Mother's Day to another Mom,
Grandmother, Aunt, And other friends you know.
May your troubles be less, Your blessing be more,
And nothing but happiness come through your door!
_______________________________________________
A woman, renewing her driver's license at the County Clerk 's office, was asked by the woman recorder to state her occupation. She hesitated, uncertain how to classify herself.
'What I mean is, ' explained the recorder,
'do you have a job or are you just a ..?'
'Of course I have a job,' snapped the woman.
'I'm a Mom.'
'We don't list 'Mom' as an occupation,'housewife' covers it,'
Said the recorder emphatically.
I forgot all about her story until one day I found myself in the same situation, this time at our own Town Hall.
The Clerk was obviously a career woman, poised,
Efficient, and possessed of a high sounding title like,
'Official Interrogator' or 'Town Registrar.'
'What is your occupation?' she probed.
What made me say it? I do not know. The words simply popped out.
'I'm a Research Associate in the field of Child Development and Human Relations.'
The clerk paused, ball-point pen frozen in midair and looked up as though she had not heard right. I repeated the title slowly emphasizing the most significant words.
Then I stared with wonder as my pronouncement was written, in bold, black ink on the official questionnaire.
'Might I ask,' said the clerk with new interest,
'just what you do in your field?'
Coolly, without any trace of fluster in my voice,I heard myself reply, 'I have a continuing program of research, (what mother doesn't) in the laboratory and in the field, (normally I would have said indoors and out). I'm working for my Masters, (first the Lord and then the whole family) and already have four credits (all daughters). Of course, the job is one of the most demanding in the humanities,(any mother care to disagree?) and I often work 14 hours a day, (24 is more like it).
But the job is more challenging than most run-of-the-mill careers and the rewards are more of a satisfaction rather than just money.'
There was an increasing note of respect in the clerk's voice as she completed the form, stood up, and personally ushered me to the door.
As I drove into our driveway, buoyed up by my glamorous new career, I was greeted by my lab assistants -- ages 13, 7, and 3.
Upstairs I could hear our new experimental model, (a 6 month old baby) in the child development program, testing out a new vocal pattern.
I felt I had scored a beat on bureaucracy! And I had gone on the official records as someone more distinguished and indispensable to mankind than 'just another Mom.'
Motherhood! What a glorious career!
Especially when there's a title on the door.
Does this make grandmothers 'Senior Research associates in the field of Child Development and Human Relations'? And great grandmothers 'Executive Senior Research Associates?' I think so!!!
I also think it makes Aunts 'Associate Research Assistants.'
Please say Happy Mother's Day to another Mom,
Grandmother, Aunt, And other friends you know.
May your troubles be less, Your blessing be more,
And nothing but happiness come through your door!
_______________________________________________
Upcoming Week a chance to Make Progress for Democratic Credibility
A few loose ends and follow-ups on items I have written on this week before a few ruminations on the potential significance of the week to come for our democratic health.
Michael Coren uses his column this week to provide his perspective on Garth Turner's no-show appearance Tuesday.
Ruby Dhalla with her lawyer, held a press conference yesterday, and sought to portray herself as a victim of a political conspiracy. I'm not in a position to judge the facts on this case but there seem to be plenty of holes and inconsistencies in the stories from all sides. However, as we learned from the Mulroney affair, a Parliamentary committee investigation is likely to add some heat, but very little light, to this situation.
Speaking of Mulroney, he will certainly be profiled in next weeks news as on Tuesday, he begins his scheduled four days of testimony before the Oliphant inquiry. I recognize that the work of this inquiry is of only passing interest to most except us political junkies. Still, I do think that getting some answers regarding why a former Prime Minister received an envelope containing $225,000 cash (to use the amount he admits to receiving) which he has gone to significant lengths to conceal without a credible explanation is an important - all-be-it expensive-- exercise.
There have always and will always be self-serving politicians -- some of whom will embarrass themselves and us (our founding prime minister was allegedly a drunk, after all). But the cynicism towards politics, some of the structural problems of our system, and a culture in which authority and office no longer has the deference it once did does put us at some risk. We are not there yet, but continuing on this path may drive us to a tipping point in which our leaders lose the credibility required to have moral authority with the public.
This isn't just a problem for our leaders but for all of us. These are very difficult things to measure but the week to come does hold out some hope that the our system remains strong enough to maintain confidence. I am hopeful that BC voters provide us some momentum towards talking about electoral reform; that the lawyers and Commissioner Oliphant conduct their business in a way that shows appropriate respect towards a former Prime Minister while persisting in getting to the bottom of what really is behind those envelopes, and that politicians of all parties -- including the Conservative critics of Ms. Dhalla, focus their inquiry into her conduct in a way that promotes the principle of equality before the law, both for publicly elected officials (who also deserve a fair shake and not a witch hunt) and for vulnerable groups (such as immigrant workers who are easily intimidated by power and not always receiving their rights.)
These matters are hardly "make it or break it" matters or the stuff that history books are likely to spend much time on, but in the "one step forward, two steps back" (or more ideally, the inverse) way of history unfolding, it could be a significant week.
Michael Coren uses his column this week to provide his perspective on Garth Turner's no-show appearance Tuesday.
Ruby Dhalla with her lawyer, held a press conference yesterday, and sought to portray herself as a victim of a political conspiracy. I'm not in a position to judge the facts on this case but there seem to be plenty of holes and inconsistencies in the stories from all sides. However, as we learned from the Mulroney affair, a Parliamentary committee investigation is likely to add some heat, but very little light, to this situation.
Speaking of Mulroney, he will certainly be profiled in next weeks news as on Tuesday, he begins his scheduled four days of testimony before the Oliphant inquiry. I recognize that the work of this inquiry is of only passing interest to most except us political junkies. Still, I do think that getting some answers regarding why a former Prime Minister received an envelope containing $225,000 cash (to use the amount he admits to receiving) which he has gone to significant lengths to conceal without a credible explanation is an important - all-be-it expensive-- exercise.
There have always and will always be self-serving politicians -- some of whom will embarrass themselves and us (our founding prime minister was allegedly a drunk, after all). But the cynicism towards politics, some of the structural problems of our system, and a culture in which authority and office no longer has the deference it once did does put us at some risk. We are not there yet, but continuing on this path may drive us to a tipping point in which our leaders lose the credibility required to have moral authority with the public.
This isn't just a problem for our leaders but for all of us. These are very difficult things to measure but the week to come does hold out some hope that the our system remains strong enough to maintain confidence. I am hopeful that BC voters provide us some momentum towards talking about electoral reform; that the lawyers and Commissioner Oliphant conduct their business in a way that shows appropriate respect towards a former Prime Minister while persisting in getting to the bottom of what really is behind those envelopes, and that politicians of all parties -- including the Conservative critics of Ms. Dhalla, focus their inquiry into her conduct in a way that promotes the principle of equality before the law, both for publicly elected officials (who also deserve a fair shake and not a witch hunt) and for vulnerable groups (such as immigrant workers who are easily intimidated by power and not always receiving their rights.)
These matters are hardly "make it or break it" matters or the stuff that history books are likely to spend much time on, but in the "one step forward, two steps back" (or more ideally, the inverse) way of history unfolding, it could be a significant week.
Friday, 8 May, 2009
Urging BC Voters to Say YES to Electoral Reform
Andrew Coyne makes the case for electoral reform cogently in his Macleans piece.
I already made my pitch on this subject on Tuesday but the issue is important enough to beat the drum a bit louder.
Because politics is broken in Canada, and electoral reform—changing the way we vote—may just be the key to fixing it.
B.C., you hold that key in your hands. If the referendum passes, it will not only transform the politics of your province, it will put electoral reform squarely on the map for the country as a whole. Whereas if it fails in B.C.—after the failure of reform efforts in Ontario, Quebec and P.E.I.—it may be the last we’ll see of it for some time.
I already made my pitch on this subject on Tuesday but the issue is important enough to beat the drum a bit louder.
Thursday, 7 May, 2009
Is Ottawa regressing to Puberty?
Scanning the op-eds this morning, I chuckled at Lawrence Martin's line in his Globe column regarding Vic Toews blow-up on the bilingualism issue:
On that issue, I find myself somewhere between Mr. Toews and Mr. Martin but the metaphor (which I found interesting following my post on Monday which borrowed a decription of the late twentieth century as "adoloscent")seemed an especially apt summary given some of the self-centered behaviour that has made the news of a few politicos over the past few days, Mr. Martin is implying childish behaviour and is looking forward to puberty as a indication of growing up; I fear we are in the midst of puberty with irrationality and fear that the prospect of getting out of it isn't as close as we hope.
Exhibit A - Ruby Dhalla. The MP for Brampton-Springdale is glamorous, energetic and career-oriented. She's also viewed by fellow caucus members as a “high maintenance” self-promoter, unwilling to do parliamentary drudgery, and demanding with her staff." cites the Globe. Ms. Dalla faces a host of serious allegations on which there is no point commenting -- due process will sort that out itself -- but it is the mindset behind these allegations, as well as her previous encounters with controversy that betray her approach.
Exhibit B - Garth Turner. He did not show up for his Tuesday's appearance on the Michael Coren show, and it appears there are some challenges to the veracity of his story. (There are previous examples of him calling producers and refusing to appear on the show with certain people - something I have always found hard to understand from someone whose brand was about open dialogue and independent discussion, but I digress.
I have the privilege of having experience with a good number of elected officials from all parties over the years and can honestly say that the immaturity expressed in recent days is not typical of my experience. Most elected officials I know are sincere people motivated by the public good. It is true that the artificial world of political Ottawa does tend to bias their sense of reality, but that does not take away from their honourable motives, hard work, and in the vast majority of the cases, huge personal sacrifice. Most give away to the public much more of their time, families, and potential income than they "take" from the system in terms of reward and perqs.
The puberty analogy doesn't quite fit since it refers to a stage that young people grow into, and then also naturally grow out of. During that phase of life, certain self-centered immature patterns of behaviour at least have a rational explanation. I am inclined to frame the exhibits above as similar sort of behaviour, except in political life, the explanation and prognosis is not quite so clear. Maybe these cases are just a few isolated examples (although I fear not, as I can think of a few more similar cases in recent years - and maybe I have amnesia but they don't seem the isolated examples they once were.)
I am not sure, but wonder whether part of the explanation might be a changing frame of what public service and public dialogue really mean. Could it be the Ruby's and Garth's of this world are a logical consequence of a different approach to public life that values power and outcomes over service and process; that is short-term gratification focused rather than long-term ideal focused, and that sorts through the issues of the day on the basis of what works and meets the eye, without reference to ideals and principles that may have a more transcendent basis?
I don't mean to imply anything about the individuals named here - I only know them through their public personas. However, I sense they are products and an expression of a predominant view that has a very warped sense of the difference between private and public. It has a view of tolerance that while can be sincere and well-meaning, most often expresses itself with intolerance and impatience with meaningful difference. It draws conclusion from a sensational, incident-driven narrative that, frankly, reminds me more of the outbursts of the spats that occur in junior high school between hormonally charged teens. The downside of this analogy is that puberty is something that we expect teens to go through and grow out of; regressing into puberty is something I fear will take more dramatic changes before our political culture changes.
Alas, the age of puberty in Ottawa is still a ways off.
On that issue, I find myself somewhere between Mr. Toews and Mr. Martin but the metaphor (which I found interesting following my post on Monday which borrowed a decription of the late twentieth century as "adoloscent")seemed an especially apt summary given some of the self-centered behaviour that has made the news of a few politicos over the past few days, Mr. Martin is implying childish behaviour and is looking forward to puberty as a indication of growing up; I fear we are in the midst of puberty with irrationality and fear that the prospect of getting out of it isn't as close as we hope.
Exhibit A - Ruby Dhalla. The MP for Brampton-Springdale is glamorous, energetic and career-oriented. She's also viewed by fellow caucus members as a “high maintenance” self-promoter, unwilling to do parliamentary drudgery, and demanding with her staff." cites the Globe. Ms. Dalla faces a host of serious allegations on which there is no point commenting -- due process will sort that out itself -- but it is the mindset behind these allegations, as well as her previous encounters with controversy that betray her approach.
Exhibit B - Garth Turner. He did not show up for his Tuesday's appearance on the Michael Coren show, and it appears there are some challenges to the veracity of his story. (There are previous examples of him calling producers and refusing to appear on the show with certain people - something I have always found hard to understand from someone whose brand was about open dialogue and independent discussion, but I digress.
I have the privilege of having experience with a good number of elected officials from all parties over the years and can honestly say that the immaturity expressed in recent days is not typical of my experience. Most elected officials I know are sincere people motivated by the public good. It is true that the artificial world of political Ottawa does tend to bias their sense of reality, but that does not take away from their honourable motives, hard work, and in the vast majority of the cases, huge personal sacrifice. Most give away to the public much more of their time, families, and potential income than they "take" from the system in terms of reward and perqs.
The puberty analogy doesn't quite fit since it refers to a stage that young people grow into, and then also naturally grow out of. During that phase of life, certain self-centered immature patterns of behaviour at least have a rational explanation. I am inclined to frame the exhibits above as similar sort of behaviour, except in political life, the explanation and prognosis is not quite so clear. Maybe these cases are just a few isolated examples (although I fear not, as I can think of a few more similar cases in recent years - and maybe I have amnesia but they don't seem the isolated examples they once were.)
I am not sure, but wonder whether part of the explanation might be a changing frame of what public service and public dialogue really mean. Could it be the Ruby's and Garth's of this world are a logical consequence of a different approach to public life that values power and outcomes over service and process; that is short-term gratification focused rather than long-term ideal focused, and that sorts through the issues of the day on the basis of what works and meets the eye, without reference to ideals and principles that may have a more transcendent basis?
I don't mean to imply anything about the individuals named here - I only know them through their public personas. However, I sense they are products and an expression of a predominant view that has a very warped sense of the difference between private and public. It has a view of tolerance that while can be sincere and well-meaning, most often expresses itself with intolerance and impatience with meaningful difference. It draws conclusion from a sensational, incident-driven narrative that, frankly, reminds me more of the outbursts of the spats that occur in junior high school between hormonally charged teens. The downside of this analogy is that puberty is something that we expect teens to go through and grow out of; regressing into puberty is something I fear will take more dramatic changes before our political culture changes.
Tuesday, 5 May, 2009
BC Referendum on Electoral Reform
British Columbia voters will head to the polls on Tuesday and in addition to electing a provincial government, they will have a referendum regarding reform of their electoral system. The ballot question is "Which electoral system should British Columbia use to elect members to the provincial Legislative Assembly: the existing system (First past the post) or the single transferable vote electoral system (proposed by the Citizens Assembly on Electoral REform?)"
The referendum is being held as a follow up to the 2004 referendum in which 58% of voters voted for change, just shy of the 60% threshold that had been set. There are plenty of criticisms that can be made about the present proposal, which would see multi-member ridings, a transferable vote which asks voters to rank candidates rather than simply choose their desired candidate, and that this particular system has never really been properly tested in other jursidictions.
I haven't been following the BC election coverage close enough to know the extent to which this campaign is being debated during the campaign, in which a tight race for government understandably dominates attention. Neither am I of a mind that electoral change simply for the sake of change is a good thing, and while the proposal has some merits, it also begs questions.
All that said, I am remain of the mind I was when Ontario voters faced a similar question in 2007 - that we need some momentum in this country towards electoral change and overcoming the democratic deficit that is eating away at our systems. BC voters can do the country a favour by voting to change their electoral system, which will spawn a debate in other jursidictions as well, which will improve citizen literacy on the options and hopefully be the start of some necessary changes to a democratic system that is clearly broken, tired, and is failing to capture the engagement of the electorate.
The referendum is being held as a follow up to the 2004 referendum in which 58% of voters voted for change, just shy of the 60% threshold that had been set. There are plenty of criticisms that can be made about the present proposal, which would see multi-member ridings, a transferable vote which asks voters to rank candidates rather than simply choose their desired candidate, and that this particular system has never really been properly tested in other jursidictions.
I haven't been following the BC election coverage close enough to know the extent to which this campaign is being debated during the campaign, in which a tight race for government understandably dominates attention. Neither am I of a mind that electoral change simply for the sake of change is a good thing, and while the proposal has some merits, it also begs questions.
All that said, I am remain of the mind I was when Ontario voters faced a similar question in 2007 - that we need some momentum in this country towards electoral change and overcoming the democratic deficit that is eating away at our systems. BC voters can do the country a favour by voting to change their electoral system, which will spawn a debate in other jursidictions as well, which will improve citizen literacy on the options and hopefully be the start of some necessary changes to a democratic system that is clearly broken, tired, and is failing to capture the engagement of the electorate.
Subsidiarity works best
Events like pandemics are occasions when arguments are often made to strengthen international bodies like the World Health Organization. David Brooks in a New York Times column makes an effective argument on why subsidiarity(pushing power down to institutions closer to the grassroots rather) works best. A worthwhile read.
Political Optimism?
Listening to a self-described agnostic the other day whose commitment to libertarian politics is unquestioned, I was intrigued at his optimism regarding the future. He noted that the left was in a moral crisis. The twentieth century aspiration for a new society based on a new understanding of humanity and equality amounted to "an adolescence stage" of thinking and that in the twenty-first century we would come to regard the predominant ideas of the past fifty years the way teenagers come to appreciate the ideas of their parents in their later teens: "When I was fourteen I was amazed at how little my parents knew but it is really quite amazing how much they have learned in the past five years. We will soon look back at the past few decades as our teenage years of foolishness." (quote not exact but a rough paraphrase of what he said.)
At the core of the argument -- not every aspect of which I agreed with, but his overall point was very intriguing -- was the fact that the attempt of social engineering would fail because it ultimately proved unsatisfying. Rather than focus on the satisfaction of outcomes, there are four institutions in life -- vocation, family, community and faith -- capable of providing meaning and satisfaction. The future would be much less focused on government (his libertarian impulse) and much more on participation in these institutions (which he probably understands somewhat differently than I, but not there are overlaps with Cardus' social architecture argument.)
Both the right and left will come to see the limits of power and government in shaping particular outcomes which, from this gentleman's libertarian perspective, provides a reason for great optimism for the future. From where I sit, this is not so much a political as existential and cultural question, and a confirmation from a different perspective of a truth that has come home to me in recent years -- politics follows and does not lead culture. As I pointed out in Monday's post, that has implications for the right too; it means that economic, justice and defense policies are not a comprehensive enough framework for the right to proceed. That poses challenges in that the thorny social questions which divide both left and right cannot be indefinitely avoided.
I see this as part of the reframing of the debate that we described as an inevitable consequence of the demise of the pan-canadian consensus in a Policy Options article a few years ago. The irony is that the issues it will raise will divide both left and right as they are currently organized in Canadian politics. Given the general cynicism that accompanies political discourse today, the constructive outcomes of that debate may be a reason for optimism for both.
At the core of the argument -- not every aspect of which I agreed with, but his overall point was very intriguing -- was the fact that the attempt of social engineering would fail because it ultimately proved unsatisfying. Rather than focus on the satisfaction of outcomes, there are four institutions in life -- vocation, family, community and faith -- capable of providing meaning and satisfaction. The future would be much less focused on government (his libertarian impulse) and much more on participation in these institutions (which he probably understands somewhat differently than I, but not there are overlaps with Cardus' social architecture argument.)
Both the right and left will come to see the limits of power and government in shaping particular outcomes which, from this gentleman's libertarian perspective, provides a reason for great optimism for the future. From where I sit, this is not so much a political as existential and cultural question, and a confirmation from a different perspective of a truth that has come home to me in recent years -- politics follows and does not lead culture. As I pointed out in Monday's post, that has implications for the right too; it means that economic, justice and defense policies are not a comprehensive enough framework for the right to proceed. That poses challenges in that the thorny social questions which divide both left and right cannot be indefinitely avoided.
I see this as part of the reframing of the debate that we described as an inevitable consequence of the demise of the pan-canadian consensus in a Policy Options article a few years ago. The irony is that the issues it will raise will divide both left and right as they are currently organized in Canadian politics. Given the general cynicism that accompanies political discourse today, the constructive outcomes of that debate may be a reason for optimism for both.
From the file of flagrant Self-Promotion
The website of Puritan Reformed Theological Seminary contains recently posted interviews with yours truly - the first on Cardus and the second on my recent article on Neo-Puritanism and Neo-Calvinism which has been published in Comment, Christian Renewal, and will also be published in the forthcoming issue of the PRTS Theological Journal.
I notice that Steve Bishop has also linked the Neo-Calvinism link on his blog.
I notice that Steve Bishop has also linked the Neo-Calvinism link on his blog.
Saturday, 2 May, 2009
Conservatives Need Plausibilty beyond Economics, Justice and Foreign Affairs
I started this blog Saturday evening, in the Pearson airport lounge, but the boarding call came before I was done so I am finishing and posting it 48 hrs later, after my first busy day behind my desk trying to catch up after almost two consecutive weeks of travel. On Friday and Saturday I attended the Civitas conference where I was able to participate in engaging debate and meet many friends from the broader Conservative movement across Canada. Friday I had the chance to facilitate a Cardus conference on independent education in Ontario where 35 leaders from the Jewish, Catholic, Christian and academic independent school communities reflected together on some of the challenges facing this sector. Both conferences took place under Chatham House rules meaning it is inappropriate to attribute any of the particulars of the proceedings. Still, there are many interesting ideas that were part of conversations. My blogs over the next few days will share of few of those ideas which I will do without attribution, but by making this note, I trust I am doing my part not to take credit for ideas not my own (plagiarism is a bad thing!) and also providing myself an escape clause for some ideas that are intriguing but not fully thought through.
At the Civitas conference, the theme of principle vs. pragmatism bubbled throughout, with some criticizing and some defending the current government. I made the point (it's ok to quote your own comments) that the right in Canada has been over-occupied with developing ideas and trying to win power, but not with creating the "plausability structures" required to sell those ideas. Conservatives end up over-focused on the political and economic spheres of life but abandoning other areas of policy to the opposition. It is not enough for conservatives simply to abandon the field on environment, arts, labour, poverty and social issues to their opponents - these are issues voters care about. If Conservatives cannot at least play their opponents to a draw on these, the results will be quite harmful. Not every election can be won on economic, justice or foreign affairs issues. This challenge for Conservatives is increasingly urgent as Mr. Ignatieff moves the Liberals to a closer alignment with the Conservatives on economic justice and foreign issues, which would leave leadership (perhaps electoral reform) as a main differentiating issue between the parties.
At the Civitas conference, the theme of principle vs. pragmatism bubbled throughout, with some criticizing and some defending the current government. I made the point (it's ok to quote your own comments) that the right in Canada has been over-occupied with developing ideas and trying to win power, but not with creating the "plausability structures" required to sell those ideas. Conservatives end up over-focused on the political and economic spheres of life but abandoning other areas of policy to the opposition. It is not enough for conservatives simply to abandon the field on environment, arts, labour, poverty and social issues to their opponents - these are issues voters care about. If Conservatives cannot at least play their opponents to a draw on these, the results will be quite harmful. Not every election can be won on economic, justice or foreign affairs issues. This challenge for Conservatives is increasingly urgent as Mr. Ignatieff moves the Liberals to a closer alignment with the Conservatives on economic justice and foreign issues, which would leave leadership (perhaps electoral reform) as a main differentiating issue between the parties.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
