SCHOOL IN CRISIS
- Details
-
Hits: 2292
VICTORIA – I’m in your face, Premier. I’m angry. I’m fed up. I’ve had it with budget cuts. I’ve had it with sanctimonious talk of caring government. I’m sick and tired of your apparent inability to deal with one of the most horrific problems – kids in crisis.
What’s got me so riled up? A little problem at Macdonald elementary school on East Hastings in Vancouver. Teachers from Vancouver’s inner-city schools have just declared Macdonald elementary a school in crisis.
It is the first time ever that the Vancouver Elementary School Teachers Association has singled out a school as requiring special aid. The association recently asked the school board for two trained adults per classroom at Macdonald. They got one support staff member of the whole school which has 300 students.
East Hastings is an area of unimaginable poverty. It is infested with drug traffic and prostitution. It’s no place for kids.
But kids do live there. They are exposed to the sleaze day-in, day-out. To get to school, they walk through it. And it rubs off on some. Life on the street appears more desirable to them than school or life at home, which for many is marked by poverty and abuse.
"The consequences are deadly. There are literally 12-year-old girls out hooking. They’re not going to live to be 14 or 15 years old," says teacher Mary Lang.
The horror stories abound. Teachers tell of a boy who has witnessed the physical abuse of his mother for years. A girl worries about an older sister working the streets.
About half of the kids at Macdonald elementary have social or emotional problems. Teachers believe that one-third of the students are at risk to the safety of other kids, or a danger to themselves, or at significant risk from crime and prostitution.
To address the problems, they need intensive one-on-one help. But help isn’t available because of budget restraints. It’s become far more important to satisfy the budget-cutting agenda of the Fraser Institute and like-minded organizations than help children in need.
Last week, Premier Glen Clark announced a partial lift of the freeze on school construction. New schools and additions to existing schools are necessary, but what’s happening to Macdonald elementary and, to a lesser extent, at other inner-city schools, surely must take priority over infrastructure.
Clark seems to have forgotten one of the NDP’s credos – the need for fairer distribution of wealth. Schools in wealthier neighborhoods don’t have the problems experienced at Macdonald elementary.
It is up to government to make sure that those at risk get more resources than those who are well off. That goes for individuals as well as schools.
Perhaps the premier needs a refresher course on the effects of poverty. Perhaps he should take a stroll along East Hastings and see for himself what neighborhood these kids live in, and where they go to school.
Maybe he should take his wife along. Women are so much more attuned to the need for nurturing and special attention, which is what this school needs.
It might also be a good idea for the premier to drop in on the school, talk to the teachers and the kids. Who says schools can only serve as photo ops for politicians during an election campaign?
One thing is certain: this problem cannot be ignored or handed to a task force. It needs to be dealt with decisively. An immediate infusion of money is needed to make sure that the kids at Macdonald elementary will have the same opportunities as their counterparts in well-to-do areas.
And don’t talk to me about the need for a balanced budget. Just on whose backs are the budgets to be balanced? The kids’? So we got a few more kids turning tricks, but hey, we reduced the deficit.
Failing to act on the crisis at Macdonald elementary school would be far worse than anything this government has done, including having lied about the budget.
IS THE CBC IMPORTANT TO CANADIANS?
- Details
-
Hits: 2816
VICTORIA – On December 11, the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation sent layoff notices to 996 employees across the country to meet the requirements of its latest budget cuts – a whopping $414 million. The layoffs take effect March 31.
At the same time, 615 CBC radio and television employees accepted voluntary severance packages, while an additional 88 vacancies were scrapped. That brings the total staff cuts to 1,699 positions, with another 800 or so layoffs expected in 1998.
The budgetary blood-letting will mean a lot of changes to viewers and listeners of CBC TV and Radio. Gone will be the Vicky Gabereau show. Morningside with Peter Gzowsky will be history. A lot of regional programming will be replaced by national productions out of Toronto.
The last time I wrote about the gradual emasculation of the CBC at the hands of our politicians, I received a lot of fax messages from the Reform Party, informing what plans a Reform government would have in store for the CBC.
Preston Manning, no less, told me he would reserve budget cuts for CBC TV. Radio would pretty well be left alone and Radio Canada International, the corporation’s world-wide shortwave service would continue to be financed.
I appreciate the information, albeit useless at the moment in the absence of a Reform government. And for Mr. Manning’s benefit, I’m not all that happy either about the slow death of the CBC’s television arm.
I don’t want to overstate the importance of the CBC to Canada as a nation, but the Crown corporation has been a ray of light in the gloom that is commercial broadcasting.
True, CBC Radio stacks up a lot better to its commercial rivals than CBC TV does, but even CBC TV is infinitely preferable to the stream of idiotic sitcoms, violent crime shows and trash TV tabloid "news" shows that seem to dominate commercial TV.
So, if the CBC constitutes such an important factor in the Canadian scene, why have successive governments been so eager to all but eliminate the public broadcaster? They will tell you that they are simply following the public’s lead.
Politicians point to poll after poll, indicating that the public isn’t that serious about the CBC. Well, it depends on what questions the pollsters ask.
Most polls the government relies on have asked whether the respondents are in favor of reducing government subsidies to the CBC. A public conditioned by a cacophonous demand for deficit reduction will almost certainly support harsh budget cuts to the CBC.
But ask different questions, and you get quite a different picture of what the public thinks of the CBC and its importance to Canada. And that’s what Louis Harris of Canada, a respected polling firm, did last November.
The Harris poll asked Canadians whether the CBC is a unique contributor to Canadian culture. Does the CBC produce quality programming? Is the CBC a waste of taxpayers’ money?
Among all Canadians asked, 74 per cent said if they were a member of Parliament, they would vote to either maintain the budget of the CBC at its current level or increase it. Only 15 per cent said they would decrease the budget, and five per cent said they would eliminate it.
Asked whether or not CBC television and radio are important to Canadian culture, 86 per cent said yes with regard to television, while the support was somewhat lower with 62 per cent for CBC FM and 60 per cent for CBC AM.
Those results are in stark contrast to the ones that have backed up the government’s slashing of the CBC budget. And based on the Harris poll, a political party could do worse than making the battle over the CBC’s survival an issue in the next election.
And if you still wonder whether or not the CBC is important to our country, I would say that 76 per cent of Canadians supporting current funding for the public broadcaster is a pretty good indication of how we feel about the CBC.
YOU JUST CAN’T LEAVE POLITICIANS UNATTENDED
- Details
-
Hits: 2307
VICTORIA – Leave Victoria for a week’s vacation and what happens? The Liberals lose their cherished virginity, and a former NDP cabinet minister is drinking from the public fountain. It’s enough to make you weep.
The Liberal SNAFU is difficult to comprehend. Sending political propaganda to 800,000 homes at a cost that may surpass the $1 million mark is one thing. Making the taxpayers foot the bill it is quite another.
The mailout consists of a one-page survey, a four-page letter from Liberal leader Gordon Campbell, a one-page petition and one page of proposed Liberal legislation.
Currently, each MLA is allowed to spend $6,100 a year on communication with constituents. That allocation is often pooled by the parties to get a bigger bang for the buck. The process is covered by guidelines
According to the guidelines, "the contents of these messages (to constituents) should be restricted to outlining legislative developments in the House and in committees and to the roles played by the member in the legislative process. Members may not print or mail, at the expense of the legislative assembly. Any material of partisan or political nature."
Blind-sided by the affair, Campbell offered somewhat lamely that the guidelines are too weak and fuzzy. The way I read them, they’re pretty clear. And a household mailer telling British Columbians that Premier Glen Clark is a liar whose mismanagement and incompetence is threatening the province’s health care, education and safety, does seem a trifle partisan.
And as if using public money for blatantly partisan purposes wasn’t enough, the $200,000 contract for printing the mailer went to a Liberal Party insider without tender and another Liberal hack, Greg Lyle, Campbell’s chief strategist in the last provincial election, received $5,000 for helping set up the whole scheme.
Should the Liberals reimburse taxpayers for the cost of the mailer? Of course, they should, but that isn’t the way Campbell sees it. The guidelines, he says, are simply not specific enough, and no laws were broken. Sorry, but the public will pay.
All of which is difficult to accept from a man who relentlessly attacked Clark last year for spending $100,000 for a TV appearance to explain the government’s budget deficit.
Clark, of course, didn’t lose a moment to exploit the issue for his own purposes. "I hope this hypocrisy, this stunning hypocrisy, will demonstrate to people just what Mr. Campbell is made of," he said.
Meanwhile, however, the premier has a bit of a problem himself. Former finance minister Elizabeth Cull, it appears has landed a lucrative consultant’s contract with the Capital Health Region.
Cull will be paid $1,000 a day for six months to develop a community relations strategy for the health board. Her remuneration will be capped at $70,000. In my dictionary, community relations strategy translates into finding ways to hoodwink the public as elegantly as possible, but that’s neither here nor there right now. Cull’s contract is.
Again, no laws are broken, and Cull, too, has got to eat. But it doesn’t look good when a former cabinet minister, barely eight months after leaving politics, gets paid so handsomely from the public purse, controlled by the party she served under.
The point isn’t lost on Clark, who says he doesn’t feel comfortable with it and wants to bring in guidelines to prevent regional health boards from offering the kind of "ridiculous" $1,000-a-day contract Cull got.
"We think the money should be going to patient care and community services. We don’t think administrators and managers should get huge salaries."
Well, I do hope the guidelines will be adhered to more closely than those governing MLAs’ communications with their constituents.
NOTES FROM WAIKIKI
- Details
-
Hits: 2117
VICTORIA – Having just lived through Victoria’s worst snow storm in history, which had British Columbians from more rugged winter climes in stitches, a week in Waikiki looked like the ticket. And it was.
There’s nothing like sunbathing in 25-dgeree weather, knowing back home the icicles are still hanging from the roof, and your biggest decision is where and when to drink your first Maitai of the day.
Not having to worry which politician is getting raked over the coals for conflict of interest, patronage or some other stupidity also helps clear the cobwebs from your mind.
On the other hand, I have yet to spend time anywhere without making notes of what strikes my fancy. The week in Hawaii was no exception. Here then are a number of observations gleaned during the flight to and from Oahu and my lazy hours at the beach, addressed to whom they may concern:
Canadian Airlines still seems to be reeling from its recent touch with oblivion. Service is not what it should be. In-flight information is sparse at best.
Yet, there seemed to be no shortage of free spirits. Considering that Canadian is the only Canadian airline flying to Hawaii, a modest charge for drinks – I had beer, wine and a liqueur on each flight – would not be a hardship on passengers and help the airline’s bottom line.
Arriving at Honolulu International Airport for our return flight, I found a huge check-in line-up. A previous flight had been cancelled and Canadian was trying to transfer as many passengers as possible onto our flight.
The result was long waits and angry passengers at the regular check-in, while two business class check-in counters had nothing to do. Only when passengers became a little vocal, did a surly-looking business class attendant condescend to process those of us who rode at the back of the bus.
To sum it up, more than a bailout appears to be needed to bring Canadian into the 20th century of customer service. The company management types who spoke so eloquently of their world-class airline ought to take another look.
I also have a word of advice for British Columbia’s tourism industry. Don’t try to get rich over-night on the backs of hapless tourists who bring their hard-earned dollars here. The natural beauty of British Columbia will only go so far.
You can get a breakfast at a fancy hotel, served on the verandah overlooking world-famous Waikiki Beach for $3.50 U.S. Try that at the Pan Pacific in Vancouver or the Empress in Victoria.
The Moana Surfrider, one of the three best hotels on Waikiki Beach, offers a dinner buffet for $16 (Canadian). I know of only one place in Victoria that offers a similar culinary feast for about $30.
And here’s one for Premier Glen Clark, if he ever gets over the budget fiasco and has time to refocus on his promise to protect health care.
The Honolulu Advertiser ran a big spread on health care U.S. style. Believe me, we don’t want it.
Health care in the U.S. has become the playground of huge corporations that have their eyes fixed firmly on profits. Patient care is secondary.
Even the hospitals that used to be run by non-profit organizations are being swallowed up by big care-for-profit institutions. Here’s a quote from the article:
"Corporate entities have redefined the mission of health care. Their primary concern is not to meet the needs of their patients and communities, but to fulfill their legal mandate to maximize return to investors. Cutting costs and boosting profits are the first considerations.
"Without a wide umbrella of protection from our elected representatives, any one of us could find ourselves out in the rain with our portables IV lines."
Find out what Beyer had to say
Election are always a hot topic
When is the Budget not a hot search