Up For Discussion

Saskatoon Municipal Election 2012

2012-03-31T19:38:00.002-07:00

Chances are good that, if you've landed here, you googled "Brandon Snowsell" perhaps looking for my website which is located here. Or perhaps I left a door knocker on your door and you are doing your due diligence and researching your civic candidate. I applaud you!

I've always had an interest in politics and I started this blog to stimulate debate. Lately, I find that there is no political party that completely speaks to the things I value. As such, my thoughts have rarely been championed by anyone. Additionally, often times, ideas are put forth not to discuss, but it seems that politicians are only interested in their well-being, or the success of their party. I personally believe that politicians are to seek the best for the people they represent and sometimes that means building consensus and not ramming programs down our throats.

The issues I speak to in this blog are typically not civic in nature, but rather federal. However, I firmly believe if we seek to speak to one another and have an open, honest discussion and not seek to "win" then perhaps we ourselves become enriched.

That being said, I do believe our current city council is making some reckless decisions and more thought needs to be put into what are our priorities? For more of my background click here and for more of what I want our city to look like click here. If you would like to speak with me about my views, I can be reached via Facebook, Twitter or email--details here.

Hope to see you on the campaign trail!

Brandon

Robocalls--Undermining Democracy

2012-03-03T09:27:00.000-08:00

I think the rest of the world, if they have time to watch our news, must be rolling their eyes. Democracy is important. The right to vote too easily taken for granted here. I think of Iraq and the real threats that average people faced by radicals that threatened to kill anyone who went to the polling stations...and yet, people went.

Here we are, lamenting that some recorded phone messages tried to trick people into going to the wrong place to vote. And, that those phone calls happened has somehow delegitimized the entire process and we should throw out the election results and have another election. What? Are we serious? Don't we have real problems in this country without again getting all partisan and making stuff up as we go.

Let's stop and think this through. Someone gets a phonecall from a recording. What do 99% of us do? That's right. We hang up the phone. I'm amazed to find that folks are actually listening to these messages. Unless it's Wayne Gretzky's recorded voice, I hang up just after I hear "this is an important message" or "you've just won a free cruise" or "you can consolidate your debt" or "your house is on fire" (okay, I haven't gotten that last phone call...but they would get points for creativity and I probably wouldn't hang up immediately--I'd smell for smoke first).

But, lets pretend for a moment that someone actually listened to the fraudulent message stating that the polling station had changed and then went to the new location only to find (insert dramatic, mystery-reveal music) that there was no polling station. "Well, Bob, that's it...I guess we can't vote now. Might as well go home and watch TV." "Of course, we could look at the VOTER REGISTRATION CARD that came in the mail, and that we brought with us, and see where it says we should go...maybe it's right after all...it's close, let's just drive by on our way home." "Oh look, there's the voting sign. Well, let's go vote."

I think it's reprehensible that anyone should attempt to trick someone into not voting. But, so far, no one has claimed that they were unable to vote as a result of these hi-jinks, or that they were tricked into switching their vote. So, let Elections Canada do their work and find the guilty party/parties. And please, let's seriously tone down the rhetoric. Trying to stop someone from voting is vastly different than succeeding in that endeavour. Our system worked in spite of some idiots and to make a mountain out of a molehill just makes the public less likely to listen when there is actually something worthy of screaming "FIRE!"

Remai Art Gallery of Saskatchewan

2012-02-14T09:57:00.000-08:00

With the revival of the Remai Art Gallery discussion taking centre stage today, there has of course been spill over onto Twitter. @MarkHorseman is against @RandyDonauer supports and @seanshaw is sitting on the fence (not necessarity against, but not entirely for--that's how I define the fence). Who's right? You tell me.

Create your free online surveys with SurveyMonkey, the world's leading questionnaire tool.

Arguing Against Lunacy Part II

2012-01-27T07:57:00.000-08:00

My last blog post generated a fair amount of discussion--which is good. It is good to explore alternate energy sources. One day oil could run out or become too expensive and we will want an alternative. As one friend suggested, only 100 years ago electricity wasn't a "right" it was a luxury.

Part of the discussion in the last post centered on a question of how I can claim to be anti-government involvement and yet not decry the tax breaks that oil companies are getting. Now, I have no knowledge of what "tax breaks" we're talking about...but, I'm not an expert. Maybe they are getting tax breaks...or maybe it's just a public perception because oil companies make billions of dollars and buy politicians...I don't know. All I know is that gas at the pump is taxed to the nth degree. I also know that when one province raises royalty rates, oil companies move provinces taking the high paying jobs with them.

Maybe there are "tax breaks" but I don't think that our government is throwing money at oil companies like some countries are doing for solar and wind. And, for that I am grateful and I don't apologize. Why? I read this article in the Toronto Sun yesterday. If there was any hope of alternative energy taking hold, I believed it was going to be found in Germany. Germany pledged to get rid of nuclear. They were investing billions in solar and wind and one article claimed that Germany was the hope of green energy. In fact, I remember hearing how our decision to not follow suit was going to leave us in the Dark Ages while the rest of the world moved to a new, improved economy.

And yet, they're running away from solar and wind. Why? At this time solar and wind are too unreliable. It's one thing for a company to receive a break in taxes when we know the result is increased investment, increased employment, increased economic development, increased prosperity. It's quite another to spend billions on unproven technologies that apparently have none of the aforementioned benefits. But, maybe that's the idea--spend all our money going green so that we have no money and are forced to live off the land...that would be green.

One day the Henry Ford of solar will emerge, on that day the public will flock to the newer and better technology. Or, perhaps as my one friend believes, the lights will go out in our generation and we should just get used to living without electricity. But, the government should NOT be throwing our hard-earned money at pie in the sky schemes that yield no benefit.

Oh, and if the Toronto Sun is too partisan here's some other articles speaking about the situation in Germany:

Reuters

Wall Street Journal

Reuters via Vancouver Sun

This post is now up for discussion.

Arguing Against Lunacy: A Rebuttal of a "Rebuttal"

2012-01-23T19:15:00.000-08:00

Perhaps the fact that an anonymous blogger mentioned me in his blogpost today makes me famous, I don't know. But, what I do know is that the logical gymnastics required to follow his argument require that you be able to bend over backwards and....well, you get the point.

If you aren't following me on Twitter, you may have missed the "discussion" so let me fill you in on the highlights. I stumbled on a discussion about the merits of going green. One fellow Twitterer was being taken to task for his observation that in some cases it is not logistically possible to be as green as one would like. I made the observation that industries will become green when it becomes economically viable to do so.

I believe this. For example, the tarsands were not developed for decades because it cost more money to take the oil out of the sand that what you could sell it for. Currently, there is no viable cheap alternative to oil for many uses--plastic being the one I brought up in the discussion. Even in electric cars, there is a lot of plastic...so, even the "green" cars are not really "green."

But, what the anonymous blogger came back to later is that electric cars should get billions of dollars in government handouts to make up for the trillions of dollars of handouts that the oil industry has received. When pressed on this point, the argument was that we built roads for gas-powered cars and that has given cars an unfair competitive advantage. Hold on I said, will not electric cars be using these same roads? Ah, yes, but how many recharging stations have you seen, was the rebuttal?

Okay, hmmm...so governments now own gas stations, I ask? At this point I'm left with, if you can't see how the government has given trillions of dollars to the oil industry, then I can't help you. What I translate that as is, "how dare you question me...I don't know what I'm talking about so I'll throw in an ad hominem attack to my straw man argument and call it a day. Thank you very much."

So, what of the trillions of dollars in hand-outs? I suspect "hand-out" is being translated as "tax break" or "reduced royalty" but since I've never received an answer I can't tell. Assuming, we're talking about reduced rates of taxation, can we please differentiate between tax breaks that oil companies may have received vs handouts that this particular blogger was advocating for because they are NOT the same thing.

A tax break is given to many industries in recognition of A) the money that they spend (in this case) on research (determining that there is oil) B) money they spend in building the infrastructure required to extract the oil--refineries, pipelines, drills etc. C) the number of jobs they are going to create and D) the fact that the government doesn't care where the revenue comes from as long as they get it, so they just tax the consumer directly. And, the income the government receives via taxes on gasoline is HUGE. It makes sense for them to give a tax break early on so they can tax the heck out of not just the gas but the income of every worker working in the oil industry. And they don't work for peanuts. So, that's a LOT of tax revenue. This is highly different than a handout whereby the government would take taxes from me and give it to some company in hopes that they'll use it wisely. That's not even revenue neutral. A hand-out is revenue negative.

I think most folks can understand the difference. I was dumbfounded that this particular blogger couldn't tell the difference...so maybe it's more complex than I'm making it out to be...I don't think so, but hey, maybe.

So, to be clear, I am not anti-green. I am anti government involvement in industry. I think we already have too much meddling. I am absolutely against the government spending trillions on electric cars. When electric cars become affordable, consumers will buy them. I'll buy one.

We have laws against pollution, corruption etc. We can debate where those standards need to be, but currently they are where--I would argue--most people believe they should be. So, it is up to the government to enforce the already existing laws and make new ones where needed. It is not up to the government to decide which industries are going to succeed or fail. Governments generally suck at business.

As an aside, in 2008 I bought a new car. I looked at hybrids. The sticker price was out of my price range and the savings that I would receive on gas would not offset the higher price with the amount of driving I do. In fact, except for professional drivers, most drivers don't realize a cost benefit from pure gas vs hybrid vehicles. One day that will change. And, on that day, the number of battery re-charging stations will outnumber gas stations. Why? Because businesses have a vested interest in ensuring that when you buy a vehicle it is as easy to maintain that vehicle as possible.

Oh, if there have been trillions of dollars of government handouts to the oil industry, I'd welcome that information...and, if you're counting highways, hold your breath on that one...because well, maybe that's another blogpost.

This post is now up for discussion.

Saskatoon Soccer Sensational Story

2012-01-19T10:19:00.001-08:00

-40 weather didn't stop 15 of FC Alliance's finest from coming out to do battle with perennial challengers Galacticos. Galacticos were sporting their yellow home jersey's rather than their preferred black this night. The jersey advantage played huge dividends for FC Alliance early on.

With Brkic, on loan from Saskatoon Celtic in the lineup for the first time, the team was upbeat coming off the heels of a victory against top-ranked Fleisch Wolfe. Not even the news that Ostapovitch would have to miss another game could dull the spirits as Fuller donned the keeper jersey.

The first half, like the entire game, was an evenly-matched battle of two similarly skilled teams. FC Alliance opened the scoring early on with a nice bit of passing between strikers Woods and Wellman with Wellman kicking a precision shot past their keeper. 1-0 in favour of the good guys.

Towards the end of the 1st half, FC Alliance on another rush down the side, Wellman again with the ball placed a beautiful cross into the box to Mensch who demonstrated that not only are his hands valuable when he plays net, but he's got a golden head (albeit berift of hair) as he headed it passed the outstretched hands of the keeper for his 1st goal of the season and a 2-0 lead for FC Alliance heading into the break.

The 2nd half opened with a tactical change for Galacticos who pushed an extra player forward. The change reaped immediate dividends for them as they drove down the side, passed into the middle and the open player made an easy shot into a mostly open net as Fuller had no chance.

Galacticos then proceeded to score two more unanswered goals from broken plays. One an own goal and another, after a spectacular save by Fuller, the desperation clearance went directly to an Alliance player who shall not be named; unfortunately the ball got away from his otherwise sure feet and a Galacticos player was there, on top of the 18 yard box, and Fuller, with no time to reposition after his Spidey-like saves, had no chance to stop the drive.

3-2 Final Score.

Summary: it was an evenly played match throughout. FC Alliance will have to find ways to continue to create chances throughout the game. Eliminate a couple of mistakes and the score is entirely different. Kudos must go to Galacticos defense (traditionally their strong suit) for stifling the play of Woods, Harris, Wellman, Dumont and Gaddess.

Fuller is quickly becoming a fan-favourite in net and at the after-match pint session it was agreed that MoM (Man of Match) award goes to the keeper.

The best "what if moment" was Snowsell--with the ball hearing and seeing Schroeder making a run up the middle--passing the ball directly to feet and Schroeder almost being able to finish. Old guy to Old guy D to D...what a glorious almost...

There had been discussion about the timing of FC Alliance's next game. NOTE next game is THURSDAY, January 26 at 10:15PM. We then play again on Sunday and the following Wednesday...

Good game lads. See you next Thursday!

If Provoked We Will Strike

2012-01-07T14:47:00.000-08:00

It's probably not a good idea for me to log into Twitter prior to having had my daily ~~fix~~ cup of coffee. One of the first items I saw this morning (pre-coffee) was the news that the NHLPA quashed the realignment proposal that was recently agreed on by the league. Getting all the owners together to agree on re-alignment was, in itself, no small feat. So, to hear that the union is against the move is surprising to say the least...well, maybe it isn't.

What was the rationale to the union kaiboshing the agreement? They thought it might be bad for the players. How might it be bad? Well, the NHL hadn't proved that the playoff format might not be better travel-wise. Huh?

Apparently the union thinks that the owners did this without any thought to the players well-being. Yup, no owner in the league really wants to win the Stanley Cup. In fact, every owner is just waiting for a chance to stick it to the players...good thing they have the NHLPA looking out for them.

You know, there was a time when the above statement might have rung true. Ballard didn't care about the Leafs, Wirtz Sr. was a cheapskate. Sabres owners were notoriously cheap. Pocklington sold Gretzky. But, I challenge anyone to honestly state that that is the case now. With the salary cap, all the owners know they have a realistic chance of winning the Cup. So, why would they knowingly realign in a manner that would negatively impact their teams chances of competing?

One thing is certain: by keeping the existing status quo there are five teams that will be hugely impacted by extensive travel: Winnipeg, Washington, Tampa Bay, Florida and Carolina.

I don't buy the argument that the NHLPA is looking out for the millionaires well-being.

I have a T-shirt that I got from my shop-steward mother-in-law as a birthday gift one year. It has a picture of a coiled cobra with the words, "If Provoked We Will Strike" and then the union letters...this is an emblem used by any number of unions. They give them out to their memberships to remind their people that they have power.

This is all about power. It has nothing to do with common sense. It has nothing to do with protecting player rights. It has everything to do with power. Unions don't give something up unless they get something. Even if that something (realignment) is good for their membership. The union knows there is a bargaining chip. So, they're holding out for more.

Realignment will happen. But, the union will look to get a couple more golden eggs out first. Cobra vs. Goose. Cobra wins. However, if Goose dies, we all lose.

2012 Introspective Retrospective

2012-01-05T17:29:00.000-08:00

I'm not a music guru like some. I can't name you the title, artist, year or studio. But certain music just moves me. My musical tastes have changed over the years. I don't listen to music on the radio too much anymore, but there are times that music "gets" me.

Tonight was one of those nights. It started with my daughter dancing, but somehow U2 made it onto my wife's iPod and "It's a Beautiful Day" was playing.

Within seconds, I'm tearing up. It reminds me of simpler times. But it reminds me that TODAY is a beautiful day. I have two beautiful children. I have a beautiful wife (inside and out). I think somehow this song connects with me on a spiritual level too. In spite of all I have done in my life, my God loves me. He deals with me in grace...but, "With or Without You" is now playing and I am again transported back in time...

...what music inhabits that place for you?

Issues in Saskatoon: Should Councillors get a raise?

2011-12-14T13:43:00.000-08:00

Mayor Don Atchison created a bit of a maelstrom yesterday by suggesting that city councillors needed a raise. Today's Star Phoenix reports that amongst councillors themselves there is no such desire. Reasons cited are that similar size cities have similar pay structures. The interesting part of the Star Phoenix article is found in the comments section where the sentiment is one of overwhelming dissatisfaction with the current council.

Recently, we've heard lots of discussion about recycling, bike lanes and homelessness. These are all important considerations. However, as one poster suggested, what about the condition of our roads? Of issues that matter to residents, where do roads come in? Well, recently I did a completely unscientific study that had input from a wide spectrum of residents throughout the city. It showed that roads and crime are the top two concerns for Saskatoonians:

Based on this, it is not surprising that council recently approved the increased Police funding in the budget. It is surprising that there were two councillors that opposed the increase. In the new budget there is also increased funding for roads; will it be enough to keep residents happy? Time will tell.

So, what do you say, do Saskatoon Councillors need a raise? This post is now up for discussion.

To Tip or Not To Tip

2011-12-05T10:56:00.001-08:00

It's probably appropriate that the discussion on John Gormley Live today was on tipping as we are now entering the Christmas Season. Folks, remember Ebenezer Scrooge this season.

But, maybe I have it all wrong. Who should get tipped? You tell me.

Create your free online surveys with SurveyMonkey, the world's leading questionnaire tool.

Merry Christmas: The Great Debate

2011-12-03T20:21:00.001-08:00

Before Reading: Take the 5 question "Merry Christmas" quiz

2000+ years ago Jesus Christ was born on Christmas Day...or so the song goes. The reality is slightly different. Yes, Jesus was born, but on Christmas Day? That's a ~~little~~ lot less likely. That there was a man named Jesus born in Bethlehem, who then lived in Nazareth, and travelled around Galilee healing people and pissing off the ruling class is undisputed. Why we celebrate his birth on Christmas Day is an interesting story.

Christianity wasn't always a predominant religion--with approximately 2 billion adherents worldwide, I think it is safe to call it predominant. However, initially it was a band of 12 ruffians (well, maybe Matthew wasn't a ruffian...but Peter, James and John...definitely unrefined, red-necks). How they were able to spread Jesus' teachings in their lifetime and then have that teaching carry on so that 400 years later it became the state religion of Rome is beyond the scope of this post...however, it was at about that time that "Christmas" started.

As Christianity grew, it was brushing up against paganism and many folks were still celebrating some of the old pagan holidays. Old habits die hard, so a move was made to have a "Christian" celebration fall at the same time as an old pagan party so that rather than give up a party, the purpose would shift. (Click here for a great discussion on the history of Christmas--I don't agree with everything...but it is in depth.)

And, really, isn't that sort of what's happened in culture today? For Christians, since about 400AD, there originally had been a focus on the actual event of Jesus' birth. However, as our society has become increasingly secularized, the meaning of the celebration has changed. For some, Christmas is about family. For some, it's about gifts. For business, it's about profit.

Some Christians think that we should fight back and demand that people say, "Merry Christmas" and not water down our holiday with "Happy Holidays." Historically, it is interesting that the predominant cultural norm has always won the day. The December holiday originally was a pagan celebration of nature/sun/solstice. As Christianity became dominant the pagan holiday was co-opted and given a new meaning. Now that commercialism is the predominant force (religion?) of our culture, gifts are taking precedence.

Fighting over a greeting isn't going to win the culture war. Christians should remember that the magic of Christmas is that the King of Kings was born in a manger demanding nothing and giving everything. Christians should be counter-cultural and should be known not for what we are against, but for the love that we show to others...whether they say, "Merry Christmas" or "Happy Holidays."

And, for those that wish folks wouldn't say "Merry Christmas," my suggestion is that, if someone does greet you that way, you simply wish them a "Happy Boxing Day." Or, simply say "thank you" for their wish that you would have a special day, celebrated however you choose to celebrate that particular day.

This post is now up for discussion.

Do the Occupy Protesters REALLY speak for the 99%

2011-11-23T12:16:00.001-08:00

I've been following with interest the Occupy Wall Street movement and it's subsequent incarnations in various cities throughout Canada. As I've stated on this blog, I support the Wall Street demonstrators but am continually at a loss to understand the movement here in Canada. Apparently, if you don't fully agree with the entirety of the Occupy movement you are then labelled and dismissed as intellectually inferior. Allow me to demonstrate. Recently, I happened upon the Occupy Vancouver movement at the very time a court ruled that the tents had to be moved. Someone in Vancouver tweeted:

Whether if you are for or against #occupyvancouver you cannot deny the fact that todays ruling is a direct violation of the charter.

to which I responded:

@alexpensato @soyvancouver not so. Upheld right to protest; just no structures on public land. #occupyvancouver

this was then met with the following:

@BSnowsell Sorry. I made a pact w/ myself not to speak to trolls. Pls stay under your bridge. cc @soyvancouver @infil00p @symbi0 #DNFTT

A few days later I was having a prolonged Twitter debate with a good friend of mine who's political leanings are diametrically opposed to mine. We often spar and generally it is good natured and I value his view even though I don't agree with it: that is the nature of a free and open society after all. But our debate was joined by another and I found it interesting that the pro-Occupy folks feel a great deal of liberty to infer motive to my opposition to the Canadian variant of the movement. When I stated my opposition of illegal demonstrations it was characterized as unease over uncomfortable demonstrations. But, I was not at all uncomfortable walking by the protesters. I've been in many uncomfortable situations, that was not one of them.

When I suggested that, far from being representative of the majority, this movement was a few malcontents yelling loudly, it was assumed that I was afraid of the voice (of the people) and that made me uncomfortable. I again asserted that I was not opposed to free speech but was opposed to the "fringe trying to derail Canada." I was then labelled as paranoid.

For all my life I've watched special interest groups and professional lobbyists make a scene to garner attention...and it works. It's how Greenpeace and PETA stay in existence. They thrive on spectacle and aim to shut the opposition up by making it politically incorrect to speak against them. If you do, well shame on you--you're against [whatever it is they're for] and NO civilized person could ever be against THAT.

This is exactly what is happening with Occupy, only instead of ONE reason for being, they have potentially thousands and no clear idea of how to acheive what they want. And yet, if you point that out--shame on you, you're anti-democracy, you're anti-freedom. There is no logic. And, if you engage the ardent Occupy folks in a discussion, you will be made to believe that you are in a minority, that you just aren't seeing things clearly.

I don't think that's the case. I think most Canadians would agree that, while there are improvements that can be made, there's nothing so wrong that we need a major upheaval or revolution. I also think that the vast majority of people believe that reasonable limits on protests are NOT an infringement on protest. Additionally, I also believe that most folks respect our courts enough to obey their rulings.

However, I could be wrong. Rather than assume I have a pulse on public perception of Occupy, I've put together a short survey to gauge understanding of (or lack thereof) and support for (or lack thereof) the movement. Please take the short survey and if you'd like to leave a comment below, please feel free to do so. This post is now "Up For Discussion."

Create your free online surveys with SurveyMonkey, the world's leading questionnaire tool.

$550,000 to Panhandlers--wise investment?

2011-11-15T20:09:00.001-08:00

Short answer: No. Long answer: No and Yes. A report came back yesterday that made some recommendations to city council surrounding the issue of panhandling. What the report found out was that people were not so much concerned with panhandling but rather with the sense of security in certain areas. In fact the study found out that many Saskatoonians feel unsafe going into certain areas at night. Downtown, 20th street, Broadway were frequently mentioned.

The report recognized that there are wider issues of mental health, addictions and poverty that come into play and further recognized that unlike Calgary and other centres that they examined we do not have sufficient resources where folks in need can be directed to. The second recommendation in fact recognized that the "larger issues" are largely provincial areas but that the city could play a role in the following areas:

(a) designing projects that are right for Saskatoon and building support for them;
(b) finding private funding to assist with such projects; and
(c) making the business case for Government funding for such projects.

The report noted that in Calgary intox facilities (for example) were run by non-profit organizations and that having them run in such a way was preferable due to the likelihood of receiving ongoing private funding.

In fact, all of the subpoints the committee made in regards to addressing the larger issues of homelessness, addiction and poverty through establishment of facilities and housing initiatives make a lot of sense. What doesn't make any sense though is the recommendation to hire five "bylaw officers" before there are facilities in place to actually address the larger issues.

In Calgary, the city that is mentioned as having this program in place, "bylaw officers" are used to interact with the panhandlers and people on the street in their given area. When someone new comes in the area they know who they are and what they are about and when required they can direct them to appropriate facilities such an intox centres or shelters or low-cost housing. As the report points out, Calgary has a wealth of these facilities (again...privately/government funded--not city funded); and, as the report also points out, Saskatoon does not have sufficient facilities. Our intox centre is regularly full by early evening.

So, the question I have is where are our "bylaw officers" going to be directing people to go to? If there are no services (and there is a recognition that sufficient services are currently not available) then what is their purpose? It appears that the sole purpose of the "bylaw officers" is to provide a sense of security to the general public. Isn't that what our police are for?

If we are going to create a program that is designed to help panhandlers or those with addiction problems or mental health issues, let's make sure we're actually helping them. Hiring 5 bylaw officers when there is no infrastructure is really just a band-aid solution that is designed to make the public feel good about going downtown at night. The only thing they realistically will be able to do is call the police. And that can be done by the very shop owners, restaurant owners and bar owners that are also in the area.

Feeling safe is not a bad thing. That is what the police are for. If we're talking about helping people off the street, we've got to have viable solutions. What the report points out is that it is private, non-profit organizations that are best suited to address those concerns. What Saskatoon should be doing is finding those local non-profit organizations interested in helping folks off the streets and aiding them in securing funding from private and provincial government sources--ie all the things the report indicates in its second recommendation. Once that is done, then and only then should the city entertain the possibility of hiring "bylaw officers." To do it the other way around is really putting the cart before the horse.

Carts are useful. They are exponentially more useful when pulled by a horse. The way the current report is structured is backwards. If it is turned around, then it becomes much more palatable. But, in its current form, it would be a further waste of $550,000. Let's hope City Council gets this right.

This post is up for discussion.

Create your free online surveys with SurveyMonkey, the world's leading questionnaire tool.

Crunching the Numbers: Roads, Crime and Jobs

2011-11-14T07:46:00.001-08:00

I've been intrigued by the idea of "Direct Democracy" recently. So, I decided to do my own little poll to gauge the priorities of the citizens of Saskatoon. Below are the preliminary findings:

Of perhaps no surprise the top priorities are roads, crime and jobs/housing costs. What I do find interesting is that despite the continual talk by the city surrounding transit issues, poor bike lanes, and the need to "not become Calgary" in terms of urban sprawl, those priorities are not being adopted by the public. Perhaps the below graph indicates why.

Over half of the respondents were neither satisfied nor dissatisfied with the job their city councillor is doing. Of interest is that the majority of the respondents that answered this way did not know who their councillor was, or what their role was. And yet over 80% of the respondants to date voted in the last election and plan to vote in the coming election.

The survey is still open and I welcome your input.

Curbside Recycling

2011-11-11T17:47:00.001-08:00

As the debate surrounding mandatory curbside recycling continues on (even though the RFP was approved, the process could easily continue on for another year), it occurred to me today that if city council really wanted to know what the people of Saskatoon wanted for a recycling program they could just ask us. There was talk of a plebiscite, but in the current age of technology we really don't have to have an official plebiscite to get a really good indication of what people think. Nor do we have to rely on special interest groups. Yes we have the John Gormley snap polls, but we can do better. We can ask the question and then see how people answer. And this can all be done openly and anonymously. Maybe it's not scientific. But, as a citizen, on important issues, I think it's important to be heard.

So, I give you one simple question about recycling. What is important to you in a recycling program. It's anonymous. It's simple. It's straightforward. And, as the results come in, they too will be shown. Will we get the program that we want? Vegas will take your bets.

Survey on Curbside Recycling

Looking forward to compiling your results

Hey, and while you're here, why not take this other short survey on issues in Saskatoon.

Don't Occupy! Get Involved!

2011-11-11T12:48:00.001-08:00

My apologies on the delay in posting. There have been developments in the life of this here father/citizen-blogger. As you may have garnered from my blog, I have an interest in political discussions AND I am a proponent of individual responsibility.

Because I love my city, and because of my interests, I prefer NOT to Occupy Anything, but rather to work within the systems and structures that have already been established. As such, I applied for a number of civic boards recently and just found out that I was appointed to the Development Appeals Board.

I am excited about this posting as it will give me an opportunity to serve my city. As a servant of the city, I endeavour to make decisions that best reflect the opinions of the people I serve. To that end, I've created a little survey that I would really appreciate your participation in. It serves no marketing goal. I have nothing to sell. I simply want to gauge how the average Saskatoonian feels about the current state of affairs in our city.

So, please take 5 minutes (honest...it's only 10 questions), and click on the below link to take the survey. I don't need your name--I just want your voice. Thanks!

TAKE ME TO THE SURVEY!

#skvotes and #OccupySaskatoon

2011-10-24T20:47:00.000-07:00

I appreciate democracy. But, I despise elections. Why? Well, for example, on Twitter recently I was following a discussion about the NDP promise to raise the minimum wage by $1 to $10.50 and then index it to CPI. Someone actually commented that it was a crazy idea to give high wages for non-skilled jobs. $10.50 qualifies as high wages?

I'm as right-wing a Canadian as you'll find (well, maybe not crazy right like Kevin O'Leary), but this doesn't mean I hate left-wing goals. Now, listen carefully...you can be right-wing and have the same goals as left-wing people. I despise poverty. I despise racism. I think everyone should have the opportunity to get an education. These are all supposedly "left-wing" goals. They are good goals. But, the way in which we achieve these goals differs from right to left. I don't think it is our governments responsibility to tackle all of the social issues. Being conservative means believing that governments role should be limited and non-intrusive.

And this is why I'm against ~~#OccupySaskatoon~~ #OccupyEverywhereElse. As far as I can make out, #OccupyEverywhereElse is protesting the governments lack of involvement in ensuring the well-being of all. But, our situation is entirely different from #OccupyWallStreet.

See, in the US, financial institutions took advantage of deregulation and loaned out money to folks that never should have qualified for loans. The government, instead of backing the individuals who'd essentially been swindled, then bailed out the ~~criminals~~ corporations in hopes that jobs would be created thus allowing the ~~victims~~ public to be able to meet their financial obligations and not lose their homes, cars etc. etc. etc. This NEVER happened in Canada. Yes, people lost their jobs. Yes, there are people that make tons more money than other people. But, no laws were broken. No Canadian financial institution knowingly abused its power and put a Canadian homeowner in jeopardy of losing their home.

And this is where Canada is completely different than the US. Not only were our financial institutions not complicit in the market crash, but our government's approach to guiding us out of the recession has been completely different. In the US the #OccupyWallStreet folks are equally upset at corporations as they are with Washington; in fact, they have a lot in common with the TeaParty folks. No one is happy with the economic situation. It's not about changing governments there--the Republicans and Democrats are both equally owned by Wall Street.

But in Canada it is a different matter entirely. You may disagree with the current government, but they are not owned by our corporations. Or maybe you think they are...in which case you work to get another party elected. Unless you think that the NDP, Greens, Liberals and Bloq are also Bay Street puppets. If you believe that--then protest away; I think you're completely wrong--and would be interested to see where you think the NDP et al are controlled by corporations...but, protest away.

#OccupySaskatoon is just lazy thinking. As Canadians, we typically pride ourselves on "not being American." We're kinder, gentler, more socially conscious...and yet, here is a movement that is basically saying we are the same as the US. What?

Oh, that's right. We elected a Conservative government and now they're destroying Canada. And of course, we can't vote them out because now we're a dictatorship so we must join with the legitimate beef of #OccupyWallStreet because we are now the same as the US.

#OccupyWallStreet is about justice and that's neither a left-wing or right-wing issue it's a human issue. #OccupyEverywhereElse is about forced redistribution of wealth (higher taxation) and that's a left-wing issue and I am against it. I am not against it because it is a left-wing issue. I am against it because I don't believe the government is the best institution to deal with complex social issues

I am in favour of smaller government (government should enact laws, maintain infrastructure, defense and health-care...it's a small list in my books) and incentives that encourage people (whether corporations or public individuals) to apply the Golden Rule in their daily lives thus working towards the jointly shared goal of justice (human value). And, I guess, this is why I hate elections. We tend to focus on the "what"--$10.50 minimum wage--and if you're against it you end up sounding like a heartless slumlord. $10.50/hr is a pittance.

The larger question isn't what should the minimum wage be, the larger question is what's the best way to ensure people aren't living in poverty? More government means more taxes. Is that the best bang for our buck? Maybe lower our taxes and incentivize us to give to non-profits who would get more mileage from our donations and then the government could match those dollars.

There's positive change that could happen in Saskatoon. I don't see any of it coming from #OccupySaskatoon. I do hope that this larger discussion gets some traction in this coming election...but, if history is any guide, all we'll see is bashing of platforms where real ideas get denigrated to the best sounding soundbite. And that's really too bad, because the issues that really matter--in this case justice--aren't right or left and their solutions will require the best minds from both sides of the spectrum.

This post is now up for discussion.

How Much Is a Life Worth?

2011-10-18T04:56:00.000-07:00

How much do we value human life? I guess that depends where you live. Today, if you are a soldier in Israel your life is worth exchanges 1000 other lives of your enemy. If you are a 2-year old living in China, your life isn't worth very much. You can get literally run over by a truck, be writhing in pain on the street and yet 18 passers by won't stop.

And, seeing the video this morning made me seethe with anger. I have a 4 year old and a 15 month old; to think that anyone could pass one of them by if something like this were to happen. It makes me almost hate humanity. People, WAKE UP! We are all in this together.

We all do this though, from time to time, in one way or another--maybe not so obviously, but we do it. It's not limited to investment bankers profiting from the misery of the working class father of 4 who can no longer afford the mortgage he was convinced to take out. When we turn a blind eye in our own communities to the racism, poverty...when we decide that "it's none of our business" that there is an 8-year old wandering the streets at 11PM. When there is a severe shortage of foster parents and children are shuffled from abusive home to abusive home and we do nothing--are we better than the 18 people who passed by the toddler dying on the street?

Getting hit by a truck is sudden and shocking. Being born into poverty, abuse and racism is a creeping death--sapping the good-will breath by breath. If we sit by and do nothing, we are as complacent as if we see the toddler lying on the street. We all see the truck, we all see the toddler lying on the street we've just convinced ourselves that if they really want to they could get out of the way or get up and get help because, really it is THEIR choice. Is it?

#BAD11 A Retrospective

2011-10-16T16:24:00.000-07:00

The very first post in this blog was a post I wrote when I heard there was a famine in Somalia. Today is Blog Action Day and I decided to participate as the topic is "food" because today is World Food Day. There is still a famine in Somalia. The post I wrote then, is still relevant today:

I woke up at 5AM on Wednesday, July 20th and read the news that famine had been declared in Somalia. The reasons for the famine are being debated and discussed. But, because this is a tragedy of, largely, human making, does that mean we are absolved of the responsibility for caring for those affected?
Can we simply chalk this famine up to the policies of a failed state, wash our hands and walk away? What, realistically can they expect? Our own governments are struggling with debt; we have less disposable income than we did ten years ago. We have our own natural disasters to contend with, we can't help everyone, all the time.
That may be true. But, if you have $20 that you can spend on leisure activities then you really can make a difference and you can save a life. We hear much about how we are living in a "global community," with a global economy. I guess it's great to say you're part of a community and it makes us feel better to be connected with our "brothers" and "sisters" around the world but if we turn a blind eye to them when they're dying what kind of a community are we creating?
Yes, Somalia is complicated. No, there are no easy solutions. But, this is not the time for debate about "why" this famine has occurred. This is not the time to find blame. This is the time to "do to others what you would have them do to you." So, the question you have to ask is: if you were starving, what would you want someone having bbq steak do for you?

Breaking Down #OccupyWallstreet

2011-10-15T20:51:00.000-07:00

I'm not entirely certain when I first heard about Occupy Wall Street. But, as I've done some research on the movement, I've come to some preliminary conclusions.

Fundamentally, I think I understand why folks are occupying Wall Street (why they are occupying Saskatoon--my city--is another entirely different subject). Let me rephrase that. I think there are two competing ideas at play; one of those ideas I agree with and the other I don't.

At the root of the movement, I believe, is a deep-felt, guttural yearning for justice. Banks that got trillions in bail-out dollars from the US government have literally done nothing. Yes, banks were in trouble. But what of the home-owner who owed the bank not trillions of dollars but thousands of dollars, what for them? Nothing. And, did the banks--the same banks that had just been bailed out--show any leniency? Any mercy? Did they reciprocate and extend credit to the homeowner who suddenly found him/herself unable to pay their mortgage? No, they didn't.

This all happened three years ago. I questioned the wisdom of the US government giving the banks trillions of dollars. And, when very shortly after those same banks gave their executives bonuses in the millions while not extending credit to anyone, I too thought not only is that not fair, it isn't right. There was outrage everywhere. Did they give the money back? Nope, it was contractual they said. They were obligated to honour the deals that had been made prior to receiving the bailout money.

And so what did the government do? Nothing. That it has taken three years for the Occupy Wall Street movement to get going perhaps speaks to the American ideal. Perhaps somewhere they hoped that the promise of "Yes We Can" would eventually become a reality. It hasn't. So, people are calling for change. The governments role is to ensure justice. They have abdicated that responsibility and the people are saying, "no more."

There's an old story about this sort of injustice. In this story there was a man who owed a king millions of dollars and couldn't pay. The king was going to sell the man, his wife and his children into slavery to pay off the debt. But, the man begged for a bit more time to pay his debt. The king relented and completely forgave the debt and sent him off--a free man.

Now, this man in turn was owed a few thousand dollars by another servant. He went to the servant grabbed him by the throat and demanded all his money instantly. The servant, couldn't pay and begged for a little more time to come up with the money. But, the first man wouldn't give him any more time and threw him in jail until he came up with the money he was owed.

Now, some friends of the recently imprisoned man, thought this was a pretty rotten deal and they went to the king to let him know what was happening. The king immediately called the first man into his throne room. He said, "Who do you think you are? Did I not just forgive your debt of MILLIONS of dollars? Shouldn't you have shown your servant the same mercy that was shown to you and forgiven his debt? So, the king then threw the man into prison until he came up with all the money he owed."

Jesus told this parable to his disciples and if you want the unparaphrased version you can find it in Matthew 18: 21-35. The king is the government of the day. The banks are the man who owed millions. The homeowners are the servants. The friends are #OccupyWallStreet. Will the US government do what is right? Will they FINALLY hold the banks to account for their mistreatment of the American public? Time will tell. Kings knew that ultimately you had to rule fairly or there would be revolt. The same holds true for any government.

Now, I believe there are a second group of people in the Occupy Wall Street movement as well--perhaps moreso here in Canada where the issues of the US don't apply as our government had put in place measures to hold the banks to account. But, there is a measure of people in the Occupy Wall Street movement that see what the rich have and are coveting. Thou shalt not covet. I have no respect for that. We all need to work for everything we get and shouldn't expect any handouts along the way.

I think though, for the most part, that the Occupy Wall Street movement--at least the part I sympathize with--isn't about redistribution of wealth. It is about justice. It is about friends--community--coming to the government and saying, "Hey, you bailed out the banks, but they've done NOTHING for us...nothing for our neighbours--they are taking our homes, they are taking our businesses...that's not right. We want JUSTICE."

It is now up to the government to show its true colours. Are they really a government of the people, by the people and for the people? Or are they a government owned by corporations and banks?

The NHL and the Centre of the Universe

2011-10-06T06:28:00.000-07:00

Very interesting news yesterday about the impact hits to the head have on the brains of hockey players. And, all I have to say to everyone who commented on my last blog post that there was no correlation between fighting and depression is, "are you so sure now?"

But let's leave that aside for now. The season starts today and so every fan is just waiting to see how their team will do. And, that's what's got me pondering: are Toronto Maple Leaf fans the most deluded fans of all time? Every year, every post regarding hockey will bring out the Leaf fans rabidly defending the fact that this year is the Leafs year.

Now, I have to out myself as a Sabres fan at this moment, because historically we've not yet won a Cup. Yes, we should have had Brett Hull been playing by the rules. And, oh my have we had some exciting teams. But, just like the Oilers in recent years, we've been a team with a very small payroll and just when players are hitting their stride we lose them because teams like the Rangers and the Flyers offer them more money than what our ownership would.

All that changed this season. The Sabres new owner opened the vault and so there is a real sense of optimism surrounding the team. But, what of the Leafs? Because our Canadian National media thinks Toronto is the centre of the universe, we are subjected to the rantings of delusional Leaf fans who again think "this is the year." Why? Does living in Toronto lower your IQ? Is the water bad? Have the radio waves somehow been brainwashing daily commuters during the 3 hour trek to and from work?

It is the duty of this blog to discuss those things that don't have a rational voice elsewhere. Toronto Maple Leaf fans...YOUR TEAM SUCKS. Respectfully submitted.

Enjoy the season everyone. I will.

Shanahan vs. Cherry

2011-10-01T10:02:00.000-07:00

Brendan Shanahan has caused quite a stir by suggesting that the NHL is seriously looking at whether fighting has a place in hockey. I'm certain that Don Cherry will have something to say about this on Coaches Corner when the season starts. But, are we really suggesting that hockey is BETTER with sanctioned fights between goons?

There are three compelling reasons that fighting should be eliminated:

1) When you think of the BEST games, what comes to mind? Stanley Cup intensity, Olympic Gold medal games, World Junior Championships. Is there fighting? Nope...or at least very rarely.

2) Is it a tactic that works? Most likely not. Drew Remenda on his radio sports show took a look at the teams with the players that had the most PIM last year and with one exception none of the teams even made the playoffs. So, does fighting equate to Stanley Cups--really, not since the era of the Broad Street Bullies.

3) This past summer three well-known hockey tough guys (enforcers, pugilists, role-players) all took their lives. Each, it was subsequently learned, suffered from depression. Is there a correlation between fighting and mental health? If that possibility even remotely exists, until evidence suggesting otherwise is produced, the NHL MUST eliminate fighting. To not do so would be like Toyota not recalling vehicles it suspected of having accelerator sticking issues. How many people are required to die before taking action?

For those that say fighting is a part of hockey; every sport evolves. Boxing used to be bare-knuckled and 15 rounds. Now they have gloves and only go 12 at a maximum. And, how often do boxers fight? Once every few MONTHS. In an era where we have 82 games, pugilists face the possibility of fighting 2-3 times a WEEK--bare-knuckled fighting at that. And, it's not just the fights. The pace is quicker. The equipment is lighter and more lethal. The players are bigger and stronger than they were in the 1950's and 1960's. Is the culmination and frequency of hits and fights too much for the brain?

Do you see fights in the NBA, MLB or NFL? Yes, occasionally when things get entirely too heated you do. The same would be true in hockey if you eliminated fighting. From time to time, a spontaneous Iginla/Lecavalier fight would break out. Suspensions would ensue. That is how it should be. But, to sanction bare-knuckled fist-fights that could potentially add to the risk of a mental health tragedy when we KNOW better--that's an egregious error that is akin to using asbestos or lead. When we have facts at hand that suggest there are health issues, we are compelled to take action. To not do so is criminal.

To those that say that fighting cuts down on the amount of stickwork in the game. Baloney. As the league is demonstrating with it's video reviews of illegal plays and subsequent suspensions, this is not an either/or issue. Both need to be eliminated. And, both can be eliminated. If we eliminate illegal stickwork and goonery from the game of hockey, what would we be left with? Fast, hard-hitting, skilled hockey. Hey, we might just have playoff calibre hockey year round.

And, maybe we won't be faced with another summer of monthly reports of hockey players funerals.

This post is now up for discussion.

Mr. Trost and Mr. Vellacot: A suggestion.

2011-09-30T10:41:00.000-07:00

Wiith Brad Trost (and now Maurice Vellacot) in the news again, I thought it pertinent to re-open this discussion. I still question whether our government should fund optional abortions. But, in terms of providing funds to IPP (International Planned Parenthood), rather than decrying the $6M that went to countries where abortion is already illegal, might a better solution be to find an agency that does a BETTER job of protecting and enhancing the lives of women in the 3rd world and switch funding to them?

Does such an organization exist? If it does, then please frame the decision not as a negative (ie anti-PP) but a positive (better organization). If, however, there is no such alternative, then rather than rail against women who feel they have no options, work towards providing an alternative.

To do anything less is to play politics with people's lives. Provide viable alternatives, or shut up. Abortion should not be used to capture a sound-bite. Life matters.

Respectfully, this is now up for discussion.

Sex Trade, Abortions...What a Week

2011-09-29T09:00:00.000-07:00

Much has happened this week that has been blog-worthy. In Saskatoon, the Police Chief and council discussed regulating sex-trade workers. I recommend two articles by Jordan Cooper: this blog post and this article from the Star Phoenix. Then, Brad Trost, publicly challenged Prime Minister Stephen Harper regarding the funding of Planned Parenthood International.

Both of those are extremely interesting events and not entirely unrelated...it's also interesting to me that the whole issue of "right-to-life" (especially given the "Designer Babies" issue I blogged about recently), has yet to be decided upon in terms of the pre-born (is it unborn? I like pre-born...unborn reminds me of the undead and really, who wants to picture their baby as a vampire?)

But, there just isn't enough time in MY current schedule to adequately tackle either of the above topics. Perhaps one day I will be able to break down the complex issues of childhood, poverty, prostitution, government legislation and on and on and on. That will wait for another day.

There was something that did happen this week that, for me, overshadowed all the highlight grabbing headlines of the newspapers. I had the chance to be a hero this week. Long after I've forgotten about the debate regarding legislation for sex-trade workers and the designer baby dilemna, I will remember that this week, I got to cement a memory in the mind of my daughter.

It may seem like a small thing, but I don't think so. If you read Jordan Cooper's article in the Star Phoenix about parents who knowingly and callously prostitute their own daughters, I think that ANYTHING I can do to protect my daughter and give her pleasant, positive memories is my primary role in life.

So, what did I do that was hero-like? My 4 1/2 year old daughter and I went for a drive on a beautiful autumn evening in a brand-new 2011 Mustang GT/CS (the CS stands for California-style and means "convertible"). Just to watch her face as the roof of the car rose up and slid back, "I've never seen that before Daddy, I did not know it did that." And the perma-grin on her face as we drove down Circle Drive looking up at the night sky viewing the stars.

We have the unveiling of the convertible on video-tape. I won't forget it. Nor will my daughter. Heck, if she does, I'll bring out the video-tape!

Please take care of each other. Do something today to love another human being. Make a memory. We may not have the answers to all of societies ills, but surely every small act of kindness has a ripple effect.

By the way, my Mustang GT test drive was AWESOME! :-)

Capital Punishment: Talk About Confusing

2011-09-22T10:31:00.000-07:00

I listened yesterday to three bits of news that had folks up-in-arms for very different reasons. I believe all three news items--although different--all point to one obvious conclusion: people are very confused about what they believe.

First thing I heard was the news that Clifford Olson is near death. Second bit of news I heard was that we can now screen 8 celled in-vitro human embryos for over 300 possible genetic deficiencies and allow the "donors" to decide if they want to then implant the "embryo" and carry it to term or flush it down the toilet. Third bit of news yesterday was news that Troy Davis had been executed.

The reactions to these events has left me puzzled. The execution of Troy Davis has been almost unanimously (at least outside the US) decried as inhumane and barbaric; the detractors say that it puts the US in the same category as North Korea, Iran and the usual suspects. The announcement that serial killer Clifford Olson is on his death-bed however, has been met with jubilation, with the suggestion that the more painful and drawn out his suffering in these last days, the better. And, the last bit of news regarding "designer babies" has, for the most part, been met with a resounding indifference.

I find this interesting. The opposition to Troy Davis' execution is not simply because there appears to be a reasonable doubt as to his guilt, but it stems further into a belief that capital punishment "period" is barbaric and cruel. Is that why we chose not to execute Clifford Olson? Is it more more civilized to lock someone in a cell for 30+ years or to end their life? Is justice served by keeping a serial killer alive and allowing him, from time to time, to make headlines with news of appeals, requests for parole, letters to victims families?

Or, do we in Canada not subscribe to capital punishment because we value all life? And, if we so highly value life, why are we willing to so easily subscribe to embryo testing whereby we get to decide who lives and who dies? Or, is embryo life akin to the life of an ant whose life we can snuff out with the casual step of a foot?

If we are so keen to prevent the suffering (whose is the question) presented by the possibility of genetic abnormalities, why when they present themselves in the person of a Clifford Olson are we so opposed to dealing with them at that point?

What is it? Is it "life" that we value? Is that why we don't have capital punishment? And, if so, why aren't we affording ALL life the same protection? It's confusing to me how we celebrate the impending death of one criminal while condemning the practice of capital punishment for convicted criminals yet at the same time condoning capital punishment for human life under the guise of pre-implantation testing of genetic abnormalities.

To throw another fly in the ointment, is it possible to value human life and still support capital punishment? Often times, opponents of capital punishment mock those with such a view as being hypocritical. Are they perhaps mistaking two competing values; the value of human life and the value of justice?

If human life is important--are there different degrees? If there aren't, then ALL life is important. If there are, then would someone please explain to me how Clifford Olson's life is more valuable than that of an unborn baby full of potential?

This post is now up for discussion.