Category Archives: social justice

Mind The Gap

economy, social justice

A new report by the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives, titled “The Rich And The Rest of Us,” finds that the top 10% of Canadians are getting richer while the vast majority (80%) aren’t moving, and some of the bottom 10% are getting poorer. What’s worse, is that those 80% of Canadians in the middle are working harder (200 hours a year more compared to nine years ago) just to earn the same amount of money, while the 10% at the top are working less.

That’s an unsustainable situation if I’ve ever heard one.

In his new book The Upside Of Down, Thomas Homer-Dixon names the growing gap between the rich and the poor as one of the main threats facing our global society. He also points out how rapidly this problem is developing, explaining that “in 1950, there were about two poor people for every rich person on Earth; today there are about four; in 2025, there will be nearly six.

The good news in the report is that government policy can make a difference. “If they had to rely solely on market earnings,” the report says, “40% of Canadian families would have experienced significant losses in incomes compared to a generation ago — even though they are working more. Canada’s tax and transfer system stopped the freefall of incomes for almost half of the population raising children.” Government can also help with the problem of people who are working more for little to no gain by cracking down on unpaid overtime.

The report concludes with a very interesting statement:

An intractable growing gap between rich and poor, in good times and bad, oblivious to work effort, is akin to the slowly building impact of climate change — a clarion call for action which, ultimately, cannot be ignored.

And, like climate change, we will continue to see rising inequality until we understand our connectivity to each other and to our environment.

Amen.

Canadian Sovereignty at Risk

canadian sovereignty, democracy and good government, foreign affairs, social justice

A few months ago I wrote about a secret meeting that had taken place between high-ranking officials of the Canadian and American governments, with a view to creating a more integrated continent. This stealth North American union project (known as the Security and Prosperity Partnership, or SPP) is heating up again, though more attention is being paid in the States than here in Canada. Some American legislators are speaking up about the plan’s threat to national sovereignty, as well as the fact that it’s being negotiated undemocratically, in secret.

If the United States government is concerned about a loss of national sovereignty, we should be even more so.

This issue is receiving renewed attention now because of a planned visit to Ottawa by U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and Homeland Security chief Michael Chertoff this Friday, along with Mexican officials. That visit will be followed up with a trip to Canada by George Bush in June.

Canadians should be paying far more attention to the prospects of deep integration with the United States. This is a country that no longer believes in the right to a fair trial, and that has still not apologized for deporting one of us — Maher Arar — to be tortured. There are things on which we can cooperate, but for the sake of human rights and national sovereignty, the US version of “security” is not one of them.

Or, if there’s nothing to worry about, then there’s no reason to keep having these discussions and meetings in secret.

Open Up

democracy and good government, green party, social justice, the internets

When Microsoft released Vista (the latest version of Windows) this week, the general reaction from a usability standpoint was underwhelming. It’s been five years since Windows XP, so computer users were expecting a lot. Instead, most of the new features seem to focus on ensuring that it’s a little bit harder to steal Hollywood movies or Vista itself, causing thieves and non-thieves to respond with “damnit!” and “who cares?,” respectively.

Then, the more substantive criticisms emerged. First, from Canadian internet law expert Michael Geist, who points out that Vista’s fine print gives it the right to delete certain programs without the user’s knowledge, and provides that “this agreement only gives you some rights to use the software. Microsoft reserves all other rights.”

Also, Vista intentionally degrades the picture quality of Blu-Ray and HD-DVD discs when played on most computer monitors. In other words, you’ll pay more for less. And don’t bother trying to fix that, because the terms and conditions state that “you may not work around any technical limitations in the software.”

Then, the UK Green Party pointed out that Vista is also bad for the environment because, even though it doesn’t have many new features, it “requires more expensive and energy-hungry hardware, passing the cost on to consumers and the environment…Future archaeologists will be able to identify a ‘Vista Upgrade Layer’ when they go through our landfill sites.”

I didn’t think that was worth mentioning until I saw Microsoft’s ultra-lame response, which basically just said, “environmental issues are important to us.” Um, good to hear. What are you doing about it?

Taken together with Geist’s concerns about user rights, and the fact that Vista isn’t that great of an upgrade anyway, the case against using Microsoft’s new OS is strong. In addition, the critical importance that computers have to our lives and economy makes this a political issue.

Fortunately, there’s a ready alternative. Open source software is the democratic way of designing computer programs. This website, for example, runs on a free, open source programming language called PHP, instead of Microsoft’s almost identical (and much more expensive than free) ASP. There are also open source alternatives to Windows, Microsoft Office, and almost any other application you’d use on a day-to-day basis.

The Green Party of Canada has called for “federal departments and agencies to transition to open source or free software for general applications and provide free technical support to Canadian companies who use this software.” It’s one of our wackier ideas, but I like it. And, the more bloated and intrusive closed source products like Microsoft’s get, the less wacky it will seem.

The Same Sex Marriage Debate

social justice

If you take for granted that reopening the same-sex marriage debate is a bad idea from a human rights and social justice standpoint, you’ve only just begun to scratch the surface of the multitude of reasons this vote shouldn’t be taking place.

First, it’s a politically cynical move. Harper’s not just doing this because he said he would. (He’s already demonstrated his sense of humour by breaking a key promise that had the word “trust” in it.) Rather, he’s orchestrating this vote because a number of his socially conservative MPs and supporters want him to prove that he’s still at least open to the idea of discriminating based on sexual orientation. (Call it, neo-openmindedness.) Since the vote is almost certain to fail, that’s the only thing he could possibly accomplish.

Second, it’s a moot move. Not only is the vote likely to fail, but even if it succeeded, Harper would need to invoke the Charter’s notwithstanding clause in order to actually outlaw same-sex marriage, and he already said he wouldn’t do that. So, again, what are we doing here?

Finally, it’s a waste of time. The House can only accomplish so much, and there’s lots to do. They shouldn’t spend any more energy on something that was already decided (and decided correctly) just to appeal to the small number of Canadians who want to believe they’re still voting for the Reform party. And Canada should not be subjected to more divisiveness because a minority government wants to boost its ratings.