Christmas is for giving, and not just to other Canadians

So apparently I am supposed to care that the Canadian government will not meet its election pledge of relocating 10,000 refugees to Canada by years end. Seeing as the United States is only looking to relocate 10,000 refugees to their country in the next few years, I feel fine if we don’t meet this arbitrary deadline.

And that is exactly what it is, arbitrary. An ambitious number put out by a party trying to demonstrate that it is possible to strive for more. That it is possible to do more for the disadvantaged and dispossessed of the world.

There are the disadvantaged and the dispossessed here at home, I am quite aware. I don’t think any Canadian paying attention to the refugee issue could have avoided those saying we should take care of our poor and homeless first. But this is a false premise.

It doesn’t have to be either or, we can do both. But like with anything in politics, it is a matter of priorities. But that is what some do, they present issues like these as if they are an either or. You either take care of the poor and homeless in our country, or you bring in refugees, take your pick. There are a lot of other sources of money in the federal budget to do both, if there was the political will.

We are all also citizens of this world. I don’t view the dispossessed and downtrodden of my country any differently than those around the world. We must be united in our resolve against war or poverty, no matter where it is. And we also must not let the spectre of nationalism rear its ugly head when it comes to such matters.

Ironically, most of the hand-wringing going on in the press and among naysayers features those who didn’t support the government’s initiative to begin with. So please, spare me the condemnation. What is important is that we are doing something.

What many neglect to mention is, for us to bring refugees, they first have to be willing to relocate to Canada. It is not an insult to Canadians that a Syrian refugee would choose to remain closer to home, in Europe. If I was in their position I would probably want to stay closer to home so I could return home more easily when the conflict is over.

Christmas is supposed to be a time of charity. Where we greet strangers with a smile and a “merry Christmas.” The very person who’s birth many are celebrating was a refugee himself. After being born Jesus had to flee Israel into Egypt to escape persecution.

So at a time of year that is about giving and not receiving, have a little heart for those around the world that are not having that merry a Christmas, no matter their religion.

Don’t be a scrooge, embrace the real meaning of Christmas, not just the materialistic one.

Senate Reform is More Realistic Than Abolition

The 2015 Canadian Federal election is fast approaching and there is a huge issue on the table that will change the very structure of our national politics.

This change involves a branch of government which many Canadians are not even aware of. Stephen Harper is once again on his crusade to do anything about the Senate. A crusade which he has long been on, which was a promise of his 2011 election campaign.

But there is one question that begs answering. Should Canada become a country with a unicameral legislature? Which is a fancy word for a form of government that only uses one legislative body to pass laws. Currently Canada has the House of Commons and the Senate, where bills must pass both houses before they become law.

To abolish the Senate, Harper would have to amend the Constitution of Canada. The Constitution Act of 1982 established the procedure for amending the constitution. For a change as drastic as abolishing the Senate, every provincial legislature in Canada would have to sign off on the idea.

So far we know that this is untenable for the Premier of Quebec Philippe Couillard, who has already expressed his opposition to the abolition of the senate. His position comes from the perspective that he does not want to see the influence of Quebec diminished in Canadian politics.

What also makes it a difficult task is trying to pass a law in through the Senate which will potentially make everyone who votes for it jobless. That seems to be a bit of a conflict of interest and will be difficult to maneuver unless Harper can exercise the power over his caucus which is usually seen.

But do we really want a unicameral legislature in Canada? 

This seems to only make it easier for a party that is in the majority to pursue their agenda unabated. I hear enough complaints about how a majority party in Canada seems to have almost complete control over government. Abolishing the Senate would only make that more so.

The Senate as it currently exists does pose issues for new incoming governments. When the Conservatives first came into power with Stephen Harper, they had a difficult time implementing their laws because of the Liberal majority in the Senate formed by the more-than-decade long Liberal government. This was also a major problem for Brian Mulroney’s Conservatives after decades of Liberal party rule.

I am personally more in favour of Senate reform than I am in getting rid of the Senate all together. I believe we should preserve our bicameral history of government. I would just like to see direct election of Senators. This position has also been tried by Stephen Harper with no success.

There really seems to be no clear answer to our Senate issue. It will probably continue to be a political football for years and years to come. Unless at some point the provinces can come to a concensus on what they would live to see done with the Senate, a concensus that agrees with the current federal government of course.

For now, just know that much of what the leaders say about the Senate is just posturing, with very little chance of becoming reality.

From User to Advocate

From a life as a drug dealer and user to a career as a social worker, Jordon MacLean has dedicated part of his life to advocating for drug users in the face of public opposition.

MacLean is a large presence, both in personality and in size. When he speaks, he speaks from experience and from his heart. A graduate of Algonquin College’s social service worker program, he is one of the organisers of a grassroots community advocacy group known as Campaign for Safer Consumption Sites in Ottawa. As their name indicates, they are a group advocating for a safe injection site in Ottawa. 

Safe injection sites are a form of harm reduction that provides drug users with sterile equipment and a monitored environment to inject drugs. Their main goal is to decrease the number of transmitted diseases and overdose deaths caused by injection drug use. They also exist as a first point of contact for counselling and other services to treat their addiction. The only such site in North America is Vancouver’s Insite clinic.

While safe injection sites are meant for the benefit of the public there is resistance to them. MacLean uses his experiences as a drug user and his ability to communicate effectively to advance the discussion about these sites within the community. Displaying that drug users can turn their life around and give back to society.

 A Little Bit of Background

Loneliness was a theme in MacLean’s life. As the only child of a single mother he often was alone, or at the very least felt that way. Growing up without a father, he also searched for a male role model.

MacLean began using drugs around grade 8 or 9. A time of experimentation for many young teenagers, he felt like he had found a good friend in drugs, describing them as a “warm blanket on a cold day.”

He moved to Vancouver later where he got to see his Dad at the end of his life, who was an alcoholic and a drug user. MacLean moved to Vancouver with the dream of becoming a movie star after being in a few shows as an extra.

“I got to see my Dad at the end of his life, he was in bad place,” said MacLean. “Maybe that is why he didn’t want to be around me.”

MacLean, while out in Vancouver, was selling large amounts of drugs and also using them. He said that he didn’t give much thought to his behaviour.

“I thought I wouldn’t make it to 40 so I didn’t care who I was dealing with,” MacLean said. “I didn’t care about getting caught because of that.”

There were times when things looked bleak. As someone involved in the drug trade there were times that he was almost killed. There were also times when things were so dreary that he contemplated suicide, “it wasn’t who I was born to be,” MacLean said. “So I just wanted to not be here.”

Getting Help and an Education

It was Dec. 5, 2007 when MacLean entered rehab and that was the last time that he used a drug. He finished smoking a joint right before he walked into the Meadow Creek treatment centre on Carling Avenue in Ottawa. Blowing out the last puff of smoke right before walking in the door.

Inside the facility he detoxed for about a week and spent 30 days in their residential treatment program. Group meetings were a big part of the experience, which he described as very therapeutic.

“At first you don’t want to say anything,” MacLean said about the meetings. “But it feels really good to get what you are feeling off your chest.”

After getting out of treatment MacLean committed himself to returning to school. He had never been a great student, unable to concentrate and eventually dropping out of high school.

He applied for the second career program and then enrolled in social service worker at Algonquin College.

During his time at Algonquin, MacLean got involved with CSCS and organised a rally on Parliament Hill as part of an assignment for a college class. A rally which got coverage in the media and community awareness to the issue of safe injection.

Taking What Was Learned and Applying It

In addition to having a career at a group home for teenagers and young adults with autism, MacLean also contributes time and energy to CSCS and also the Drug Users Advocacy League.

Catherine Hacksel, who works with MacLean describes him as having a huge heart and possessing a tremendous amount of energy. With his responsibilities outside of advocacy he still finds the time to consistently attend meetings and stays involved. He does not use his busy life as an excuse.

Hacksel first met MacLean when he was in the social service worker program and wanted to get involved with advocacy. His college class from social service worker program organised a rally advocating for safe injection sites that took place March 23, 2014 on Parliament Hill.

“The group from his class organised the event,” Hacksel said. “He was a big part of getting people out to the event.”

An event in which “100 or so people and a lot of media” showed up to take part and document. A rally that sought to promote the awareness of Ottawa’s need for a safe injection site.

MacLean also canvasses door to door throughout Ottawa to engage people about safe injection directly where they live. He said that the response he receives is very positive. He says that while he meets some resistance, many people change their mind when they are presented the facts.

The Other Side of the Coin

Safe injection sites are not without their detractors. The mayor of Ottawa, Jim Watson, contends that they are not the right approach for Ottawa. He believes that instead of investing in safe injection sites the city should focus on an abstinence based approach.

“I believe with the scarce resources that we have we should focus on treatment,” said Watson. “Based on conversations with our police chief and Vancouver’s I don’t think it is the best approach.”

Critics point to the fact that drugs are illegal. The one safe injection site that exists in all of North America – Vancouver’s Insite – exists under a federal criminal code exemption. For a site to open in Ottawa it would require getting an exemption from the government to allow drugs to be legally used on the premises.

Words Have Weight

As a former drug user MacLean doesn’t like to describe himself as an “addict” and also doesn’t refer to himself as “clean.”

“I don’t like to use addicted, or clean or better,” said MacLean. “At first I used to say I’m clean, right? But I never use that anymore because that means I was dirty before.”

Words have imagery behind them. Words shape the very perception we have of people. They create an image in the mind’s eye. The word dirty carries behind it an extremely negative connotation.

He believes that this inequality is unacceptable. Just because people are addicted to drugs should not mean that they do not have the same access to care.

“Everyone deserves to be heard and have respect,” said Maclean. ““If society doesn’t care about these people then why are they ever going to want to change and make the community a better place?”

The Professional Opinion

There are other influential people within the community lobbying for the opening of a safe injection site. One of those people is Jeff Morrison, former president of the board of the Centretown Community Health Centre. Morrison also ran for city council in Somerset ward during the 2014 Ottawa municipal election. An election in which he finished second to Catherine McKenney’s 4,000 votes.

He understands the resistance to opening such a site, but also stresses the importance of the sites when it comes to public safety.

“Most people in the community understand the health benefits of a safe injection site,” said Morrison. “They also understand a safe injection site would reduce the number of discarded needles in public places, and would provide drug users with a contact to the health system.”

He believes that politicans may fear the “not in my backyard” reaction from the public. They also fear that they will be seen as encouraging drug use.

Where Do We Go From Here

Like any social change, minds are slow to change. Public opinion has slowly been changing over the years on safe injection sites. There has been increased coverage in the Ottawa media because of multiple academic studies conducted stating Ottawa is in need of at least one, if not more, of these clinics.

There are already locations willing to host a safe injection site. The Sandy Hill Health Centre has already put together a petition to be the location of such a site. The largest opposition they face is the opposition at city hall and on Parliament Hill, but that is also changing.

“There is so much more support and there [are] so many politicians that are now for it,” said MacLean. “When before it was very hush-hush, you couldn’t even say you supported it.”

MacLean acknowledges that both sides have their point of view and they respectfully disagree on the subject. He believes that the facts are on his side. That no matter what opposition he faces, he will stand up for the rights that he believes drug users deserve.

“40 people died last year of overdose and 10 people got HIV in Ottawa,” MacLean said. “It could be your brother, it could be your sister, it could be your mother.”

The Politics of Opportunity

Politics is what it is, politics. Accurately described in the second half of its definition in the Merriam Webster dictionary “the debate or conflict among individuals or parties having or hoping to achieve power.” And sadly this is exactly what we see occurring with the sexual harassment scandal on Parliament Hill recently. Parties using any opportunity to denigrate their opponent heading into an election that is less than one full calendar away. Politics seems to be about public policy as much as it is about public relations. In the constant public relations battle that is politics, it is to be expected.

We saw the rhetoric immediately after Trudeau had suspended fellow Liberal MPs Massimo Pacetti and Scott Andrews. The NDP’s Stephen Mulcair decried how irresponsible and harmful it was to the victims to make these harassment claims public against their wishes. He stated, rather ironically, that Mr. Trudeau was simply politically grandstanding.

Think for a second if Trudeau did nothing. How would that look politically? Heading into the October election – though it could be earlier – Trudeau would most likely be accused of trying to sweep bad publicity under the rug.

While he would probably privately reprimand and punish those MPs in some way, the public 

backlash might sink the Liberal’s chances of becoming the new governing party. It would be a political weapon used against Mr. Trudeau, to demonstrate to the public how he is unfit to govern. Another arrow in the “Liberals are scandalous” quiver. Evoking the scandals such as the Sponsorship Scandal which catapulted the Conservatives to power back in 2006

I would say that Mr. Trudeau was in a situation that seemed to have only one option. If he did nothing it would be potentially disastrous for his immediate political future. While some question why he had to hold a press conference to announce he was suspending two members over sexual abuse, he would have had to explain their absence at some point. I don’t think the media would accept the fact that two Liberal MPs were told to pack up and go home without questioning the reason. If Mr. Trudeau mislead the media about why the MPs were suspended, it would certainly be used against him.

There are politics on both sides. To describe the steps taken by Mr. Trudeau as simply the moral thing to do would be looking at politics with blinders on. Mr. Trudeau clearly stands to benefit somewhat with female voters – though this effect is debatable. I think a better description would be disarming a public relations time bomb.

It is unfortunate that a situation as serious as sexual harassment gets turned into a political hot potato. I think this reality is in certain ways more insensitive to the victims. The story has gained more interest because all sides are getting in on the controversy. Though it might not have fallen completely out of the public eye, it wouldn’t be as close to the front page as it has been.

A lot of the time the average voter just sees the headline and the main talking points and form an opinion from there. It has nothing to do with the intelligence of the average voter, but has more to do with time invested. Most people just hear about these things when they break. And they usually don’t stick around to hear the details as they become available.

Another political fact is that the NDP see the Liberals as their main rival. They know that they aren’t going to syphon any voters from the Conservative party. Their best strategy in the upcoming election is limiting the amount of people who voted for them in 2011 jumping to the Liberals.

While the Great Bloc Quebecois implosion of 2011 contributed to the NDP being the official opposition for the first time. Quebec seems to be swinging back towards the Liberal party. A province which back in 2011 had a deep distrust of the provincial Liberals. That same Liberal party is now back in power and big gains in Quebec in 2015 look very likely. The Liberals lost 7 seats while the NDP gained 58 seats in Quebec alone. They also benefitted greatly from picking up many seats from the Liberals in other places around the country.

There many provinces in 2011 where Liberals lost ground and NDP gained. The biggest of which was Ontario – where Liberals lost 27 seats while the NDP gained 5. While Ontario became a deeper shade of blue with 22 Conservative pickups, I don’t think the NDP have their sights set on those seats. Flipping Liberal seats is much more attainable for ideological reasons.  

Polling suggests that if we had an election today it would most likely be a Liberal minority. This according to electionalmanac which uses many different polls to tabulate its results. It currently states 41 per cent of those polled intend to vote Liberal, 32 per cent Conservative, 17 per cent NDP and 5 per cent for both the Bloc Quebecois and the Green Party. This indicator and many other analysts are suggesting that a Liberal minority is the most likely result of the 2015 Canadian federal election.

That was a little bit statistic heavy, but I think it illustrated the stakes involved. Any little thing will be latched on to like a barnacle for political success. Anything that has the ability to influence public opinion will be seized upon.

This may be the longest election cycle ever experienced in Canada, and that is a big reason that this is being made into a political issue. It may also be the first legitimate three way race for federal leadership that Canada has seen in a long time. With the stakes so high, needless to say, everything will be used as ammunition. Like when soldiers would run out of musket rounds and would start firing rocks and other objects from their gun.

The likelihood for a Liberal-NDP governing coalition is high. While the NDP hold out hope that they will be elected as the governing party, they are also pragmatists. They also know how to read polls.To gain more seats and especially Liberal ones would increase their influence within the minority. Some of have suggested this recent dust up may have soured their relationship, that this might impact a potential coalition. I think these men have been in politics long enough to understand how the game is played. Power is what they desire and together  For all the small-l liberals in Canada, or just for people that are sick of Harper and the Conservatives, they hope this won’t stand in the way of that political alliance.

Let's Take a Minute to Reflect Before Acting

There were two attacks in Canada this week on military personnel and an attack on parliament. I am left with one pressing question in the back of my head. Is our government exploiting a tragedy to further its political agenda?

It is understandable that Canadians want answers and want changes so the chances of these kinds of attacks are minimised. But the speed at which the Conservatives whipped into action was quite remarkable. Stephen Harper took to television not even 12 hours later to condemn it as a terrorist attack. Harper made it very evident that Canada was taking a hard line approach to terrorism and that Canada “will not be intimidated.”

I could focus on the word terrorism and how politically charged a word that is. But I would rather focus my energy on the fact that legislation aimed at beefing up security to fight terrorism was already in the works before the events of this week.

It was only 24 hours after the killing of Cpl. Nathan Cirillo and the attack on parliament that Harper stood in front of that very House of Commons saying “our laws and police powers need to be strengthened in the area of surveillance, detention and arrest…that work which is already underway will be expedited.” I don’t think anyone can ever say too soon when Harper barely waited 24 hours to push the party agenda forward. It is never too soon to criticise the government response, because the government does not wait. This too soon tactic is meant to shut down any significant debate to the contrary.

In his address to the House of Commons he outlines the fact that laws that were already being tabled will be sped up because of this current tragedy. There are many critics who are hesitant to act in a reactionary way. That we should not make drastic changes to our security measures just because of two incidents.

There was also news of this new proposed legislation that I felt was completely glossed over. Peter MacKay stated legislation would include “pre-emptive actions specifically in the area of terrorism, but not to rule out areas in which we think we can prevent crime." This is a public admission that this legislation is not just for stopping terrorists. It feels to me as if the Conservative government is using this opportunity to push legislation that they want, but that doesn't necessarily meet the concerns of Canadians. This quote gives immediate credence to the people who believe this is a slippery slope. That if given this ability, it will inevitably be used for other purposes.

I understand that Canadians are scared. The events of this week were very traumatic and jarring. It crossed party lines, as we saw when the party leaders hugged it out. But is the current government playing off the fear and irrationality of Canadians at this time to further their political agenda? I would say it is no secret that the Conservative government have these ideals as part of their platform.

I really don’t think the party that you support matters. I don’t think this is the time to push a political agenda. Canadians are still recovering and the wound is still fresh. Let’s let it scab over a little bit before putting on some ointment.  

Player Morale and Management's Role

The Blue Jays wrapped up their 2014 season being known for something. They are now known as the team with the longest playoff drought in North American Big 4 sports. With a drought standing at 21 years and counting these are not good times to be a Toronto sports fan.

Obviously in this world on fire this is a very trivial matter. But the question does beg an answer. Does Alex Anthopolous deserve to keep his job?

Generally I am not someone who is knee-jerk. I might be rather impulsive in my real life, but when it comes to sports I am a bit of a pragmatist. It is difficult to have a long term plan for your franchise if you are bringing in someone new every year. This is why companies don’t fire the CEO for having a bad quarter or two.

That CEO must have the confidence of his board of directors but he also must have the confidence of those that work under them. A workplace is reliant on morale to keep it running at maximum efficiency. While it appears Alex Anthopolous does have the confidence of the people who pay his cheques I am not convinced he has the confidence of the player he signs the cheques for.

Obviously I don’t know what is going on internally in the organisation. I am just someone sitting in their apartment waxing poetic about a team that I care about. But what is the morale in the Blue Jays club house and how is that effecting how they go to work every 

day?

In the lead up to the 2014 season A.A talked about the Blue Jays’ need for starting pitching. There was the documented debacle that was the Ervin Santana attempted signing. A situation where Alex claims that everything was going smoothly until Santana abruptly decided he wanted to pitch in the National League. Which is understandable. If I was on a one year contract where my performance dictated how much I would be paid the coming year I would certainly choose the path of least resistance. Instead of getting knocked around the A.L East and taking a pay cut the coming year.

We all saw how displeased Jose Bautista was when no major moved were made at the trade deadline (unless you count Valencia as a major move.) It reminded me very slightly of the owner in the Charlie Sheen movie Major League not bringing in reinforcements to end the season. While I am certain Jose Bautista wasn't the only one upset by the lack of reinforcements he speaks for the team as its leader. So really this is a question of morale. Can we expect the 2015 Blue Jays to play inspired baseball for an organisation that didn’t do much to help them? Based on how this year’s team went into the tank not that long after it is hard to come to any other conclusion. In the military a commanding officer that doesn’t command the respect of his privates isn’t very useful.

Jose Bautista is frustrated because the prime of his career is being wasted. He is arguably the greatest player that has ever worn a Blue Jays uniform. While he hasn’t worn it for that long he is setting almost every record concerning “fastest to _____.” Jose Bautista is a player who has never been to the playoffs and he certainly wants to see his team do everything it can to get there. I am not sure how much Jose Bautista cares about the long term future of the Blue Jays when he might be gone or retired. This is where a bit of the divide between player and management lies.

While we hope that athletes getting paid more for one game than most of us make in a year would play inspired no matter what. But consider a job that you had where you had little respect for or confidence in your employer. It probably impacted the job that you did. While maybe not even consciously. I am talking about small things that cumulatively add up. Morale is a big thing in any work place. Why do you think companies stress its importance? No matter how much you get paid the respect level for your employer impacts your performance. Optics is everything.

The 2015 Blue Jays are going to look very different than the team we saw this year. Two-thirds of the starting outfield may be different. The bullpen is going to have to be reworked and the Jays should work to bolster their bench. Gibbons appears to be coming back but if there is a new General Manager I doubt he wants a manager from the previous regime. Whoever is in the post of General Manager certainly has their work cut out for them.

Alex Anthopolous has done a great job of replenishing the Blue Jays from when he took over. But if A.A does stay he certainly has some fences to mend.  

Toronto Maple Leafs Unsustainable Special Teams

Toronto Maple Leafs Unsustainable Special Teams

What can I say about about the Toronto Maple Leafs unsustainable run that has not already been said? It is obvious to anyone who watches. Let alone individuals who actually analyse the statistics that are so incredibly damning. The Maple Leafs were successful for a period last season and earlier this season but they have, as expected returned to where they were expected to reside. They were expected to reside on the bubble of being a playoff team or being on the outside looking in. Overall their special teams is just unsustainable and is already showing it’s effects. Their powerplay efficiency, and penalty kill have a great indication on the success that they will have. With the Leafs current system they must take less penalties.

Not only do they rely too much on their powerplay (28.6% of their total goals) which is 7th highest in the league. I don’t believe this is sustainable in a league that acknowledges that it has less penalties in the post season. It might be an effective way to score a lot of goals in the regular season, but when the playoffs come you cannot expect to receive the same calls that you get in the regular season.

If Toronto is a team that survives on special teams they are not doing a great job of it on the penalty kill. The penalty kill was something that they prided themselves on last year (87.9%) which was good enough for 2nd in the league. And was a component of their team that was greatly improved with Randy Carlyle’s arrival. This season they are currently residing at 78.4% which ranks them 24 in the league on the penalty kill. This penalty kill efficiency is around Ron Wilson PK levels. Personally I thought this was one of Carlyle’s biggest upsides but it certainly isn’t this year.

What makes this especially troublesome is the amount of time that the Leafs spend on the penalty kill. The Leafs have had 111 penalty kills which is the 5th most in the NHL. They also lead the league in times short handed (119) which is the best stat for this.

The Leafs have drawn a lot of penalties this season. While it is not easy to track penalties drawn. In terms of plays that are borderline but they embellish that extra bit to get the penalty. They are among the league leaders in opponents penalty minutes at 404 which is good enough for 4th in the league. 

A stat that is an interesting indication of how much time a team spends on the powerplay compared to the penalty kill is called “penalty efficiency ratio.” Which according to Sporting Charts is “is a statistic that measures the number of power play minutes a team has for each minute of penalty time. This attempts to measure the relationship between the time a team is on the power play compared to the time a team spends killing a penalty. The higher this number the more time they spend on the power play compared to penalty kill.” 

The Maple Leafs currently have the fifth worst penalty efficiency ratio at 0.90. And with a penalty kill that is so inefficient in my opinion it is only logical that they are going to give up a lot of goals. 

I don’t think it takes an expert to say that a team should take less penalties and draw more penalties. The Leafs do have a lot of time spent on the power play but definitely have to become more disciplined. This is especially important playing the way that they do. If you are going going to give up a lot of shots. I suggest you don’t take so many penalties. I don’t think that takes a rocket surgeon.

All statistics from http://www.sportingcharts.com/stats/nhl/team/