George Marshall's Ideas

Book Review: Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal by Ayn Rand

2006-09-10T09:01:00.000-07:00

This is an surprising review for two reasons. The first is that this book was written 40 years ago and I'm just getting around to a review now. The second reason is that I'm not in the habit of reading garbage and I usually just set a book on fire if it doesn't meet some minimum standard. But I heard so many people saying that she was really bad without any substantive criticism that I assumed that they disliked her on idealogical grounds. But there is so much more.

To begin, I should state that I find her ideology repulsive. Of course, the main idea is that capitalism is the greatest system in history because it is in touch was man's nature as rational, self-serving being. Capitalism doesn't derive its justification from maximizing social welfare, which she also believes, because social welfare is not the salient issue. Furthermore, a rational, self-serving being cannot make the rational choice of altruism. Efforts to reach out to others is nothing more than the result of a degenerate Left, which had also crept into mainstream politics during the Johnson administration and resulted in a government's dubious assertion that it had the right to protect social welfare and which consequently refused to abandon the mixed economy which included elements of the welfare state, or statism as she called it.

Frankly there is so much wrong with her book that it would require a tome to do justice to her falicies alone. So I'll pepper over her frequent quoting of her other books, the fact that she uses her fictional charicters as empirical evidence to illustrate her hypothoses, her idea that "A=A" can be used as a proof of her theories and her incessant use of hyperbole, not as a rhetorical device, but as a logical gaff. There is plenty wrong with her more basic premises upon which, I believe her entire political ideology is based.

She frequently clamors for human freedom. She means it in a libertarian sense: governments should get out of the way of individuals, the only elements in society who have rights. Society is nothing more than an agglomeration of individuals who form groups which have no meaningful identities of there own and thus aren't entitled to rights. Though dubious, we'll move on.

These individuals have a right to life and to freedom, which most Westerners will grant, with a particular understanding of what this means. For Rand, freedom is nearly absolute. Society has no claim on the individual save that individuals do not kill others or violate their private property. This rather extreme view is based on human nature, according to Rand. The essence of man is his rationality, which can only function given the utmost of freedom. By essence, she further explains that she means "that which seperates us from the rest of living things". Very curious. She believes that we ought to base an entire system of philosophy and political ideology on the basis of humanity's unique traits, while completely ignoring the traits which we share with other creatures. By her premis, it would seem that computers would be entitled to greater rights than humans, or else humans wouldn't be entitled to any rights because rationality is no longer the sole possession of man. This is grotesque. A philosophy which claims to be in concert with human nature would do well to include a greater extent of man's experience of himself, ie, his non-rationality.

She goes on to claim that man cannot be free without the guarantee of property rights. She treats as equivalent (in her essay on anti-trust laws) the experiences of the Jews under Hitler, the Ukrainians under Stalin and the American businessman under Johnson. That is, a person's life has the same value as their property. And as a coralory, a person's right to property is greater than rights that any social grouping a person might belong to. This does not seem consistent with the view of rights deriving from rational capacity: surely there is a greater potential for rationality between persons than between person and thing.

There are so many other specific points of the book which deserve critism but this review is long enough. I'm putting this book on my index. I might even burn it tonight. Everything you've heard about it is true. Don't bother reading it.

The end of oil

2006-08-23T10:31:00.000-07:00

I always love speculations about this because I believe it tells one a good deal about how fuzzy-minded people can be. According to The Economist (August 12-18), the company with the largest quantity of proven oil reserves, Aramco (with about 10 times the capacitly of Exxon), has enough proven reserves to supply the world for 70 years. Given the approximate current oil consumption of 80 million barrils per day (https://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/xx.html), times 365 days per year, gives about 29 billion barrils consumed per year (assuming, for their benefit that consumption rates remain constant indefinately). The Economist's source declares Aramco's proven resourses at some 250 billion barrils. Divide that by 29 billion, and you get 8.6207, which apparently rounds up to 70. Hmm.

For the sake of interest, given a constant rate of oil consumption (again, for the sake of simplicity), given the proven oil reserves of the world, 1.35 trillion barrils (https://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/xx.html), at 80 billion per year, our proven resources would be exhausted in 47 years.

The Economist has noted time and time again, however, that the "proven" reserves are of very little value for making such predictions. Again they note that Aramco is exploiting only 10 of its 70 wells, suggesting that they have quite a bit more potential remaining. But for the life of me, I can't figure out how they came up with 70 years.

Best Concert-Humanitarian Fundraiser Ever

2006-08-09T10:59:00.000-07:00

I will be playing as part of La Guitarre Trio, with Rob Drew and Devin Krauskopf on Friday, August 18 at 8:00 at the Kirk of St James. The program includes Bach, Piazolla, my music and other standard repertoire. Tickets are at the door and cost $8. Half of the proceeds will be donated to the Mikinduri Children of Hope. See http://www.mikinduri.com/ for more of its details. See you all there!

Make Poverty History With Two Hours Traffic, Guest Speakers

2006-06-29T10:55:00.000-07:00

A concert featuring popular Island performers Two Hours Traffic,
slated for June 29th at the Joe Ghiz Memorial Park, will celebrate
the anniversary of Live8 concerts and a year of Make Poverty History
activities.

One year ago, over 3 billion people watched as some of the world’s
most popular musicians took to the stage in ten cities including
Berlin, London, and Philadelphia. As the likes of Elton John,
Madonna, Stevie Wonder, Youssou N’Dour and Sarah McLaughlin sang
their songs, “Make Poverty History” was the message and the leaders
of the G8 nations who were gathering to meet in Gleneagles, Scotland
were the intended recipients. Later, those leaders would be
congratulated on their negotiations that led to promises on several
key issues: $50 billion more aid per year by 2010; Debt cancellation
for 38 countries; Primary education for every child by 2015; AIDS
drugs to all those who need them, and care for all AIDS orphans;
Help to double the size of Africa’s economy and trade by 2015.

Around the world, people involved in the Make Poverty History
campaign were buoyed, but not complacent. In 2005, thousands of
events were held to draw attention to the factors surrounding global
poverty. In Prince Edward Island, local organizers held a rally in
September, a walking tour of poverty on October 17, a poverty forum
for federal election candidates in January and in February public
information sessions and a concert were held during the ECMA’s.

According to Simone Stahel-Webster, "Organizers can look back on
many successes in 2005. Mobilization by Make Poverty History
committees nationwide raised the awareness amongst Canadians about
poverty issues in Canada and abroad. More than 215,000 Canadians
have signed on to the MPH campaign and 178 MP’s pledged their
support to MPH objectives."

Still, there is much to be done. G8 Finance Ministers will meet next
month in St Petersburg and Make Poverty History campaigners will use
that occasion to encourage the leaders to keep the promises made
last year and go further. Stahel-Webster says PEI organizers will
join activists around the world later in the year to keep public
attention of poverty issues; “We’ll be riding on the big wave of
support that has developed over the past year. The main focus of the
MPH campaign in 2006 will be the month before October 17th, the
International Day for the Eradication of Poverty. MPH movements
around the world chose October 17th to be the International White
Band Day of Action in 2006.”

Two Hours Traffic will perform at the free concert on Thursday, June
29th from 7 to 9 p.m. at Joe Ghiz Memorial Park on Kent Street in
Charlottetown. The concert, also featuring Brielle Ansems and
Courtney Francis. Speakers will address the issues that are key to
the campaign - fair trade, elimination of debt to poor countries,
foreign aid and domestic poverty reduction. If it rains, the event
will be held at the Basilica Rec Centre on Richmond St.

Jack Nicklaus, Tom Watson vs. PEI Health Care

2006-06-19T20:25:00.000-07:00

I don't mean to criticize people who spend their own money on whatever harmless leasure activity they choose. But I do mean to criticize a government that spends the people's money on a leasure activity that is restricted to the ambit of the rich. Golf has almost no value to our society, as such, and so the government's sponsorship of it is a bit of a problem. People don't learn anything playing it and they don't get fit. It's kind of like sitting in a hot tub or watching a good movie. There's nothing wrong with these things, but it would be asinine to pay a couple of bathers $1.5 million to demonstate how efficiently they can do. I hope Mitch Murphy is enjoying the game, at least. By the way, I want my $10 in taxes back.

Charlottetown dithers on cosmetic pesticides

2006-06-14T04:43:00.000-07:00

City council has just moved that they ask the province to ban cosmetic pesticides. It is an accomplishment of sorts since last month they decided that they wouldn't ask the province. But the request holds little promise since our environoment minister, Jamie Ballem, has repeated stated that he wouldn't do so. This is a token gesture from city council to deflect criticism that they are not listening to the citizens. Charlottetown can and should take the lead on this issue.

See http://www.theguardian.pe.ca/index.cfm?sid=2903&sc=1 for the Guardian story.

Nova Scotia Election

2006-06-13T20:58:00.000-07:00

Kudos to all the parties who picked up seats in the Nova Scotia election. NDP is up 5, Conservatives are down 2 and the Liberals are down 3. It's also nice to see the Greens make a decent showing in their run.

Our Role in Afghanistan

2006-06-08T21:11:00.000-07:00

After a narrowly approved parliamentary motion, Canada has renewed its military commitment in Afghanistan for 2 more years. Parliament didn't have adequate time to debate the motion and consequently didn't address some important questions such as: what are our targets for success? What is our exit plan? Are we doing more harm than good? Can the military play a humanitarian role? I think what we are involved in is foolish and you can read about why (and about many other things) in the latest free issue of Subversion, available at Timothy's, Beans, MTX Pizza and a host of other Charlottetown establishments.

Mikinduri Update

2006-05-24T14:24:00.000-07:00

The Mikinduri yard sale (and plant sale this past weekend) made over $10 000 for our projects on the ground. There is tremendous work being done in Kenya and we're so happy to be a part of it here. As a member of the Mikinduri Children of Hope fundraising team, I would like to thank everyone who donated and came out to volunteer or find some deals. May we all continue to work toward a better world.

The government's gambling problem

2006-05-18T20:07:00.000-07:00

PEI's provincial treasurer, Mitch Murphy, is again being called to defend the racino (an abbreviation for ridiculous immitation casino). Now it seems that not only is it going to increase problem gambling, but the government will probably loose money on it too. Atlantic Lottery Corporation is pressuring the government to expand it into a full-fledged casino--palatable, no doubt, because revenues are wildly below projections. Not that we believe them, but the government is claiming that they won't expand the racino to a casino. Mitch Murphy says he believes that it can make a turnaround in the summer. He seems pleased that its been able to attract a small new clientele and says " My comfort level will be good after the summer season." No sir. You should be ashamed. If you can't balance the government budget without resorting to promoting addiction which tears families apart, you don't belong with the treasury or the government.

Very Happy to be working in Souris?

2006-05-10T21:39:00.000-07:00

Re http://www.theguardian.pe.ca/index.cfm?sid=2540&sc=2

I realize that Russians have a bit of a reputation for stoicism, but still, this doesn't look like a photo of Russians who are "very happy".

Mikinduri Children of Hope: Yard Sale Fundraiser

2006-05-08T15:20:00.000-07:00

On Saturday, May 13, the Mikinduri Children of Hope Foundation will hold its annual yard sale to fund-raise for Mikinduri, the Kenyan village you see above. The funds raised so far have gone to the areas of need identified by the village leadership. The "feeding center" in this picture was one of our first priorities. We are additionally fundraising for irrigation projects which are underway and a maternaty ward for the local clinic.

The yard sale will include something for everyone, including household items, plants, antiques and Mothers' Day presents. There will also be a bake sale and fun activities for the kids.

Where: Charlottetown Civic Center

When: May 13, 9:00am -1:00pm

If you want to make a donation, you can drop it off at the Civic Center on Thursday, 5:30pm-7:30pm or Friday, 10:00am-6:00pm. For more information, email me at george.marshall@mail.mcgill.ca or call Ted Grant at 566-2976. Also, you can find our website at http://mikinduri.com/

Gig at The Marketplace

2006-05-02T12:18:00.000-07:00

This Friday, May 5, I will be performing at the Marketplace from 7-9pm. The address is 13 Queen St, which is across the road from Confederation Center of the Arts. The music will be partly original stuff: some singer-songwriter sounds and some modern classical music influenced by Latin American, Spanish, German and Indonesian composers. I'll top it off with standard classical guitar repertoire: Bach, Villa-Lobos, etc. The cover is $5. Come on out for something new!

Island New Democrats Leadership Convention

2006-04-27T19:07:00.000-07:00

The IND had its annual convention and used the opportunity to elect a new leader, in the person of Dean Constable on the weekend. It was a fantastic convention full of initiative and enthusiasm, which will allow the party to make a major contribution to the Island's political scene. Don't miss my article about this in the upcoming issue of Subversion Magazine, obtainable in many Charlottetown outlets such as Timothy's, Beans, Cedars, and Town and Country.

Things an Environment Minister Should Not Say

2006-04-05T23:05:00.000-07:00

“This is a species that if it becomes a real problem, and a large nuisance, then it’s a population that can be eradicated.” -Environment Minister Jaime Ballem

Maybe I'm a bleeding heart environmentalist hippy with no appreciation for other issues, but I'm a little off-put by these remarks from PEI's Environment Minister. The context, of course, is that he's decided to bring a population of wild turkeys from Ontario to provide hunting opportunities on the Island. And instead of studying what this could do to the local environment and address concerns about avian flu, his solution is to plow right ahead with extermination as his contingency plan. Not sound policy.

It's not even clear why we should bring wild turkeys here to begin with. They don't provide any obvious economic benefit. If anything, this would create greater competition with local farmers' for their turkey sales. The turkeys aren't intended to provide any needed ecological benefit. Instead, we are left to wonder just what possible negative environmental impact the species introduction will have. Maybe none—but if so, no problem; “its a population that can be eradicated.”

This brilliant idea is being buttressed by the local chapter of the National Wild Turkey Federation. So how is it that a province without a wild turkey population has a Wild Turkey Federation? Well, I'm still puzzled by this one-the national web-site doesn't provide any answers. Incidentally, the “National” Wild Turkey Federation refers to the “nation” of USA. Yup-PEI is under the jurisdiction of the United States' NWTF. Perhaps the details of this American lobby group will be clarified soon.

In any case, I do think that we should take a step back. Its time to ask how PEI will benefit from this arrangement. I'm not at all interested in letting our government form ostensibly Canadian policy at the behest of an American lobby group. And when the argument is made for bringing the turkeys here, it should probably be made by someone in agriculture, trade, or economics—the most likely place to look for benefits.

And against this we need to weight the potential costs. What potential risks do we face with foreign species introduction? Is there a chance that this could promote avian flu? Will this cut into farmers' turkey profits? And why is it exactly that that we humans, let alone environment minister, have a right to transplant a population of animal species with a presumed right to determine its very existence?

The environment minister should be shaking his fist and crying foul at this idea. There are some legitimate environmental concerns here. It is the responsibility of the environment minister to address environmental concerns—this isn't rocket-surgery. To suggest as a plan the eradication of a species if something goes wrong is illegitimate. And it begs the province’s premier to search for a new environment minister—one who understands his portfolio and his loyalties.

AIDS in Uganda: Rare Good News

2006-04-02T17:13:00.000-07:00

This group of young AIDS victims is educating fellow Ugandans about AIDS. Through the efforts of them and others, AIDS prevalence is rapidly declining in Uganda.

The AIDS situation in Africa is depressing to almost anyone who gives it a second thought. Perhaps this is why we tend to look the other way whenever we are faced with the issue. We need to hear some good news every now and again if we are to believe that there is a fight worth fighting. In this climate, it is refreshing that we've received good news from John Humble, the Atlantic regional director for UNICEF.

Mr Humble has just returned from a trip to Uganda, where he was doing research for UNICEF in order to promote the campaign for greater UNICEF funds. I attended his public presentation at the Confederation Center Library on Wednesday, March 29 because I was familiar with Uganda's AIDS victory and wanted to hear a little detail from him.

For a bit of background, Uganda is a typical African nation in many respects. Poverty is the norm. Literacy is reserved for the privileged few. Women are denied many basic rights which our society promotes. Infant mortality is high. And until recently, some 15% of the population was infected with AIDS—the disease which afflicts some 29 million people in Africa and 44 million people globally.

And of course, AIDS is on the rise. Even in Canada, the prevalence is growing at about 2%/year. But not so in Uganda. In fact, as of 2005, only 6% of the population faces the scourge of AIDS. That's a 60% reduction in the rate of AIDS prevalence. Even Canada has something to learn from this. Part of this good new relates to the death of those afflicted with AIDS. But more important is the effect of the programs of the government and NGO's.

Mr Humble spoke largely of the work done in the country of AIDS educators. UNICEF is one such actor. They team up with local organizations to educate the public about AIDS. Some important lessons they are helping to spread are:

You won't be cured if you have sex with a virgin;
But you'll probably infect that person;
Condoms will help prevent sexual transmission;
You can't get AIDS simply from touching someone.

This last point is particularly poignant. Many victims are ostricized from their communities because people think they can catch the disease by touching victims. Mr Humble made the point of shaking hands and hugging victims to prove the point that there is nothing to be afraid of if you aren't sharing blood or sexual fluids. This kind of education ensures that even if AIDS will cut short a victim's life, they can still have dignity in their communities.

There is much positive work being done on the ground in Africa with some very encouraging results. Let's ensure that this continues. You can be a part of the healing which has already begun. Donate to Unicef at http://www.unicef.ca/. Save somebody's life.

Off with the crows?

2006-03-21T18:45:00.000-08:00

Personally I like crows. Maybe that's because I don't live by Victoria park, I don't park a car there and I don't have the birds defecating on me. Maybe that's why. Maybe I would feel differently if those three factors were different as it is for a number of Charlottetown residents. Still, I think, I would like crows.

But that's not the point. The residents are fed up with them and want them gone. They are willing to have the city raise and spend $60 000 next year and $30 000 each additional year to have them gone. I have several objections to make at this point.

My first objection is perhaps a bit academic. But I agree with the host of protesters who ask why we humans have any right to dictate where the crows go. I think the main argument against the birds stems from our hubris: we're better so we decide. Maybe its because we're bigger and smarter or maybe its just an elementary moral principle that we're better than animals. I'm sure everyone has their own personal justification for believing in our right to decide. As for me, I side with the crows.

Another objection which I hope will eventually be dealt with satisfactorily relates to the methods for bird removal. My understanding is that they are to be removed through high pitched sounds inaudible to humans. Right, but what about the other animals? Are our cats and dogs going to be tortured through the night as well? What about the other species of animals living in the park? Will the sounds drive all wildlife from the park? It seems to me that this issue may require a good bit of study or if that study has been done, a bit of public education about the findings.

And now putting personal idealologies aside, just where are the birds going to go after being removed from the park? Deeper into residential Brighton? York Point? Or will they just scatter as the bird remover hopes? His prediction is noted but he strikes me as a potentially biased sort. Maybe I'm just cynical.

Maybe the birds will go back to where they came from...the forested country-side. Or at least they might if we hadn't decimated it. The question was posed in a recent Guardian letter as to whether the birds had migrated en masse to the park as a result of rural deforestation. This requires some serious attention. I have been deeply saddened to note the vanishing woods of our Island during the past 10 years for I love trees. Even more than crows. Trees don't come in murders, they don't keep you awake at night and they don't deficate on your car. A tree has never done that. But is their disappearance responsible for crows doing this? We need to know so we can put policies in place to ensure our logging practises don't negatively impact other in our society--if indeed lack of forest is the salient issue. If it is, than loggers must be forced to compensate those affected through a new tax scheme. But maybe deforestation isn't the problem. Still, we need to find out.

In an ideal world then, we would find out why the crows have suddenly multiplied at the Victoria Park area. We would try to address the cause with concerned parties. Any solution would involve the input of 1) wildlife experts who explain why the crows are there; 2) residents adjacent to Victoria Park; 3) residents of areas which may be effected by crow migration; 4)environmentalists; 5)loggers; 6) city council; 7) those entreprenneurs who claim to be able to solve the problem.

Nobody wants a $60 000 solution that won't work. And we don't want the problem to be sent elsewhere. That isn't fair. We want a lasting solution that respects the wishes of all interested parties.

The way a crow
Shook down on me
The dust of snow
From a hemlock tree

Has given my heart
A change of mood
And saved some part
Of a day I had rued.
  -Robert Frost

The UPEI Cadre's Printing Decision

2006-02-20T16:56:00.000-08:00

The recent riots in the Islamic world protesting the images of the prophet Mohammed in less than flattering depictions in Western media suggest the Danish Newspaper, Jyllands-Posten had ill-conceived their cartoons. On top of this, the UPEI paper, the Cadre, has unwisely undertook to reprint the pictures with their own commentary. Moreover, the discussion has degenerated into an argument of free speech. I say degenerated because the central question is not related to free speech but to the ethics of printing such material in the first place. Free speech is a largely Western legal concept which has a rather limited application: to insure that governments don't censor the opinions of the citizens arbitrarily. This is not the point we've reached. In fact, nobody's right to free speech—i.e. in a legal sense—has been abused at all.

The point we're at is that editor Ray Keating has made the unethical choice of printing the 12 cartoons from the Jyllands-Posten and the owners of the paper, the UPEI student union, have recalled it—an action fully within their rights as owners. Whether the student union was truly free, or was bullied into doing this by the university president, is an interesting question for speculation but it is not the question being asked and moreover, it is secondary to the ethical dilemna.

Simply, the pictures should've never hit the news stand because printing them was wrong. Why? I offer two answers to this which correspond to the two major streams of ethical theory, namely, Kantian ethics and utilitarianism. The Kantian principle is that any action or principle which cannot be accepted for everybody cannot be acceptable for a particular individual. So how is Mr Keating justifying himself? In his words, “Journalists must do anything within their purview to ensure that absolutely nothing stands in the way of the absolute RIGHT to print or broadcast as they see fit.” Well, if this “absolute right to print” applies to Mr Keating, than it should apply to Ernst Zundel, Louis Farricon, The Heritage Front, Adolph Hitler, etc. We would allow racism and all other opinons free reign, if we had such an absolute right. I don't think I'm off base in claiming that our society doesn't want this. It certainly isn't guaranteed by our charter of rights and freedoms as Mr Keating seems to believe.

What is the utilitarian analysis of the ethical issue? The principle here is the greatest good for the greatest number. So, whose interests are being served by publishing the images and whose interests are being denied? Well, no doubt Mr Keating's interests would be served by his doing as he wishes. Also, there is a valid point that those who are curious about the pictures gain something from seeing them in mass media. They certainly have more information for making an informed decision about whether the comics should be printed at all. And there are those who gain satisfaction that this proves we have a truly free press. Finally, we must add there is a cross-section of society—which one hopes is small—that wishes to see an inflammed or otherwise offended Muslim population. In this category fall people of racist motivation as well as those who simply like to be provocative and edgy.

And those who are harmed? Well the 12 people dead in protests in the Muslim world during the past few weeks are a good place to start. Of course I don't hold Mr Keating personally responsible for their deaths, but his actions along with the others who printed the cartoons were necessary conditions for the violent protests which have resulted in death. More directly his fault is the offense taken by the local Muslim community, such as one local Muslim women who said she felt as though she was being publicly violated. And of course, we can't forget the rest of the nation's Muslims who have by this time heard of the decision to print and who are similarly offended.

It strikes me as obvious what a utilitarian should say of the ethical dilemna. The offended Muslims (and offended non-Muslims, like me) were greater in number than those who were glad to see the images. Their pain was far deeper than the defenders' gain, if protests--violent and non-violent--are an accurate guide. And I would suspect that this issue will resonate longer for those who were offended than those who felt they were upholding freedom.

Of course not everyone does an ethical analysis the same way; mine is unique. But the ethics seem so self-evident to me that I am mystified that someone could believe printing these photos was the right thing to do. I choose to believe that Mr Keating simply didn't consider the ethics involved.

Campaign Wrap Up

2006-01-26T14:14:00.000-08:00

Well, the election is wrapping up and we have much to celebrate. Of course, the big gain is national. We're up to 29 seats in parliament (up from 19 seats), and this in the wake of Paul Martin's fear-mongering-- urging voters not to vote NDP since this would supposedly hand the country over to Harper. Nonsense; the NDP made gains because of what we offer Canadians and we're better poised to get results for ordinary Canadians in the upcoming parliament.

Locally, we still made a great impact. NDP support in Malpeque is steady at 10% and this in spite of several factors, beyond our control, which could've slowed us down considerably. Holding steady is a testament to the strength of our vision and campaign. Of course, the social democratic vision of our party has accomplished much for our country. And I, played a modest role in communicating a few new ideas to the general debate. We received 1983 votes for our efforts but more importantly, we're making sure that politicians are talking about, and offering answers to, questions that are important to Canadians.

Regarding the campaign, I was delighted to be chosen as the candidate. It gave me the opportunity to present my ideas on several topics. Very near to my heart is the issue of international development and my unwavering belief that we need to stand up to the plate and take our international commitments seriously, which has been one of the driving messages of the Make Poverty History campaign. I've also spoke out to address the decline of family farming in our riding; the outmigration of our youth; our stubbornly seasonal economy; and of course, a vision for the future. I plan to continue to pursue these issues, as an unelected citizen and eventually, as an elected MP.

But the bulk of the work was really behind the scenes. In this respect, the tireless effort of my official agent, Daphne Davey cannot go un-applauded. Although a fellow political neophyte, she handled all aspects of the campaign with cheer, efficiency and thoroughness. Well done, Daphne. I must also thank Matthew Keeping for his enthusiasm when I would wake him up at his apartment daily. I expect to be returning the favor shortly. J'Nan and Kirk Brown showed up for all the events, helped canvass, put up signs and provided unending words of encouragement. Leo Cheverie was instrumental in our fundraising efforts, a voice of great support and an inspiration as a veteran of social causes.

I must also thank Peter Meggs, Tony Reddin, Marion Copleston, Julie Puiras, Brian Pollard, Ryan Pollard, Marlene Hunt, Mark Greenan, Richard Baker, Lorraine Begley, Jacquie Robichaud, Larry Hale, Michael Wadowski, Edith Perry, Regena Russell, Jonathan Stewart, Jennifer Marshall, George Marshall (i.e. my father), Marion Marshall,Calvin Roberts
Bruce Yates, Colleen MacQuarrie, Ruth Brewer, Sylvie Arsenault, Irene Larkin, Terry Pratt, Sol Feldstein, Evelyn Feldstein, Morgan Hughes-Davies, David Sims, Paul Chaisson, Ann Wheatley, James Rodd, Allison Ferguson, Mary Burke, Aggi Rose Reddin, Dean Constable, Fred Horne, Ann MacCallum, Anne Lie-Nielsen, Betty Fay, Diana Stewart, Dr. Herb Dickieson, Joe Byrne, Ron Kelly, Judy Goodwin, Miranda Peters.

We've seen that the NDP is a party that gets results for ordinary Canadians. And we see that Canadians, and increasingly Prince Edward Islanders are demanding these results from a government that is reluctant to listen. So our efforts must continue. In the upcoming parliament we will continue to fight for Canadians. And the NDP team here in PEI will redouble its efforts to build upon the support we've already received. We'll transform Canada into what Canadians want it to be and we'll do this with a stronger NDP presence.

Ideas on Small Business

2006-01-19T09:09:00.000-08:00

The NDP and the three other parties represented in Malpeque were given the opportunity to lay out their plans for small business in Crapaud on Tuesday. The Liberals and Conservatives talked only about money while the Green Party addressed only the environment. Representing the NDP, I looked more broadly at the issues, discussing our funding plans as well as the structure of our economy and public infrastructure and human capital.
Obviously funding is important. This is why the NDP is committed to providing additional funding to small businesses and entrepreneurs. We will see that small businesses have greater access to loans. And we'll put forth rules that prohibit using size as a criterion for lending. Further, we'll expand access to seed capital for small firms. We'll streamline the interaction between small businesses and government.
Additionally, the art community on PEI is a key area where we have many small businesses, often of a single person. We'll expand funding for the Canada Council for support of artists. We'll introduce a system of tax averaging to provide fair and equitable tax treatment for Canadian artists. And we'll provide sustained funding for the Canadian Television Fund and Telefilm Canada. The artistic community we have in Malpeque in places such as Victoria are a huge tourist draw and benefit our economy greatly. We hope to build on this: for art's sake, for beauty's sake and for our economy's sake.
But what are the problems we face that relate to economic structure? The two big issues are seasonal employment and youth migration. And these have disastrous consequences for the possibility of would-be entrepreneurs. To begin with youth migration, one obvious reason they leave is so that they can pay off their student loans. Alberta, Taiwan, Japan, USA: these are all places our youth need to go to pay off student loans: on average $20 000 upon graduation. The NDP committed 1.9 billion in the last budget to take tuition fees down for next year. And we're committing to further address the previous Liberal education cuts. I'll have a few more words about youth shortly.
The other major structural problem is seasonal employment. I am committed to working towards full-year employment promotion. Part of this relates to artist support. The summer is a particular boon for artists who find new markets with the tourists who come. I'm interested in expanding markets for year round exports, which could benefit painters, writers, musicians and artists of other media. This relates to my plan for infrastructure which I will discuss shortly.
Another growth area is IT. PEI has a great set of skilled youth who stand to gain by IT developments. We are going to hire hundreds or thousands more workers with these skills for tech support as internet access is extended. And we'll need further help for computer networking and troubleshooting for the next wave of digital developments.
And this brings me to the infrastructure issue. PEI can be a complete internet zone. With Intel's new WiMax technology, we would have to invest very little to make this happen: we are past the days of laying down kilometers of copper wire. Each station would have a broadcast radius of up to 50 kilometers, and has the broadband of serving hundreds of households. This represents a small capital outlay but there are tremendous employment opportunities. I envision dozens of small tech companies sprouting up to facilitate this infrastructure building, and I believe our government needs to get ready for this.
Of course, in addition to the jobs this would create, it would benefit the small businesses in existence. Most of the small business owners I know don't yet have web pages. But this would be infinitely more useful in an Island-Wide internet zone. Tourists simply need to know where to go, and we could help them. Also, this technology would assist communications in the agricultural sector. And it could help our artists. In addition to web sites and online advertising space, it could help provide an export market for artists' products. Our public infrastructure is increasingly becoming digital and whatever party is chosen in the election is going to have to understand the digital world.
The NDP has strong general commitments to public infrastructure and human capital, which the Liberals have ignored. Some highlights include our $100 million boost to public transit in the last budget, which we will continue to promote. And we'll increase funding for human capital in addition to funds earmarked for university students. We'll take a part of the EI surplus the Liberals created, and invest it in job creating training programs. Lifelong learning is key, and we'll have many new skills to learn as we create these new economic opportunities and small businesses.
We see that PEI is a region of great talent and yet this talent, with no local outlet, is forced to go elsewhere, where skills are rewarded. Let's reward skills here. Let's assist our small businesses and create new ones. Let's support our single entrepreneurs, such as our artists who benefit our Island in numerous ways. Let's give young people a convincing reason to stay on PEI. The NDP's plan is the best one to make sure that these things happen.

What Isn't On The Election Agenda: A Little Global Context

2006-01-15T20:11:00.000-08:00

We live in a country of great and extensive prosperity. Our annual national income per person, our life expectancy and educational attainment are all among the highest in the world. And due to the vision of national leaders such as Tommy Douglas, Lester Pearson and Pierre Trudeau, we have a strong social support network which ensures that our national prosperity is spread out, although inadequately, perhaps.

We should not minimize our current problems. Health care, day care, education are all in a state of disrepair after a decade and a half of Liberal cuts. We must restore these to a pre-1992 level and the NDP is committed to seeing that the government does this.

But restoring our international commitment will take much more work. Why? Well, for one, under the Liberals our international commitment waned. We used to give .45% of our national income (GDP) to aid, and now we only give 0.29%. Under the Conservatives, this would only get worse, since they are committed to cutting out our tax base. And this is during a critical time. The world has made some very real progress and this stands to be undone if we don't act.

While poverty rates are down and health and education are up, still, 1.1 billion people live in absolute poverty (less than $1/day), 1.0 billion people are undernourished. Life expectancy is 45 years or less in 15 countries and these figures stand to get much worse, very quickly. The scourge of disease and most especially AIDS is crippling Africa. In South Africa, the continent's richest country, life expectancy is 46 years-down from 56 years during the apartheid era! This is a fate which is a serious danger in many African nations which don't yet have infection rates of 30%. We must act immediately to see that this doesn't happen and we must reverse the trend in the hardest hit areas.

So in this spirit let us act. The NDP in the last budget increased our foreign aid by $500 million and if we continue to do this we will meet our .75% commitment by 2015. I will promote this aim if I'm elected. Moreover, I will establish a federal fund to supplement this. Every worker would have the option of donating 0.5% of his or her paycheck, tax-deductible, to a charitable fund administered by the federal government and used to combat the developing countries largest problems. So if you make $500 per week, you would have the choice of donating $2.50 each week. Such funding is necessary if we are to fulfill our recently defined role in the fund to combat AIDS, Malaria, and Tuberculosis.

Every time we have an election we have choices to make. This time, we are going to talk about how we are going to help out those in the Third World. We are, indeed, at a crossroads. The past 15 years have been very successful in raising living standards the world over. But much of this progress may be lost if we ignore the scourge of disease which afflicts the poorest nations. Let us choose to help. I encourage you to vote for the party that you feel is serious about making the necessary changes to our government. Let's help the Third World lift itself out of poverty so that one day the whole human family can live the good life which so many of Canadians enjoy.

NDP Poverty Platform

2006-01-13T19:39:00.000-08:00

In her December 24 letter to The Guardian's editor, Ann Wheatley demanded those of us who are running for office this election to answer some questions about about our poverty strategies. She is right to do so. Our government must be accountable to its citizens and especially to those who the government has failed. And at last count, the Liberals had failed about 5 million Canadians.

Space forces me to be brief, so I will only address only a few of the well considered points Mrs Wheatley brought up. For one, she speaks of youth, like myself, whose student loan payments often eat up about 30% of income. This would never have been an issue if the Liberals had been supporting students for these past 15 years. The NDP's immediate solution has been to inject $1.5 billion into education, to help keep tuition at an accessible price with the aim of eventually reducing tuition. These funds are also to be earmarked for various trades which in PEI, are in high demand.

Investment in education aims partially to help citizens create better careers. Now, PEI has the second highest unemployment rate of the provinces. This is due in part to the extent of our economy and partially to its seasonal nature. The funding for training must take the local reality into consideration. Our small economy has certain advantages over large economies. This is the lesson we learned from the "East Asian Miracle" It is quite easy to build linkages between different sectors in small economies. Since "everybody knows everybody" in PEI, people can easily network and create business connections. This applies for small businesses more than large ones. The task is for government to create the climate in which this is possible.

Part of the solution is insuring that young entrepreneurs have the support they need. Youth's paychecks can't be devoted just to rent and student loans. The NDP's plan to bring down student debt loads will help. And the funding for training must be to develop skills that will help entrepreneurs- skills such as computer repair, web-site design, music recording, marketing.

These skills which I've mentioned stand to help with our seasonal economy. Partially they will provide opportunities year-round, thereby easing the burden on the employment insurance fund. And partially they compliment our tourist economy. These four skills I've noted are all necessary for attracting tourists to PEI. The marketing is obvious. Web-site design and computer repair are an extension of marketing. And music recording helps local artists to reach out to the outside and provide a potential draw for tourists.

But this plan does nothing for those who don't fit into the new economy. We need to maintain and strengthen our social safety net. More than any other party, the NDP is committed to this. In the last budget we were responsible for $1.6 billion investment in affordable housing, $100 million in protecting wages in the event of bankruptcy and other measures. And with enough support this election, we intend to increase day-care investment by $1.8 billion so as to create new spaces across the country.

Of course, there are specific groups of people who I haven't addressed: seniors, farmers and fishermen, First Nations Peoples. These target groups must be dealt with separately as they all face very special challenges with respect to poverty. In the coming weeks, I and my party will be talking about these groups in depth.

But the task of challenging the poverty of other groups is quite a task of its own. And based on the local unemployment statistics, the state of day-care and generally, the cuts to social programs, we can see this is a task the Liberals are ill-suited to address. And the Conservatives would insist upon greater cuts to these programs, which would not be affordable if we cut as many taxes as they propose. The NDP is the only major party that is serious about combating poverty. And we'll do it with the resources which we have.

Agriculture Debate

2006-01-13T19:32:00.000-08:00

The agriculture debate went well for the NDP. We would like to thank all the other parties for helping out. They have shown that none of them are serious about helping out farmers. The Conservatives put forth their plan for effectively eliminating supply management, one of the few supports the Liberals have managed to keep for farmers. The Green Party put forth its plan of bankrupting Island farmers by phasing out export markets. And the Liberals' record itself is a good argument against it: they negotiated the elimination of direct farmer support by 2015 at the WTO, without a plan for farmers who will surely all lose their farms at that time.

What do all the other parties have against farmers? Why are they unwilling to find solutions-- lasting solutions--that work for local and national farmers' interests? Well, the Liberals and Conservatives have been co-opted by the agribusiness elite. They work on behalf of big-business. And the Green Party can't escape from its simplistic vision that we are either in the Garden of Eden or on the verge of extinction. Their environmental concerns are valid; but don't ask struggling farmers to pay the price--losing their livlihood-- for their very dubious environmental vision.

The NDP, on the other hand, offers a sensible solution. We balance the interests of all interested groups and offer real, lasting solutions. Farmer income support doesn't work as it is. The CAIS program needs to be simplified so that farmers don't need to jump through hoops for 3 years in order to receive the support they needed yesterday. We need more personnel to hear appeal cases and the appeals should be heard by staff that understand farmers' plight and are empowered to act to support farmers who are struggling.

We must limit the role of big business in agricultural decision making. They are the ones who are leading the agenda. They are the only group that has profitted in agriculture since NAFTA. The Liberals and Conservatives sold out the small farmer. The NDP hopes to strike a new balance through Ed Broadbent's, 7-point-plan for government accountability. Under the plan, corporate lobbyists would be forced to disclose their fees and expenditures so that we can see what stake they may have in determining policy.

And most importantly, we must establish new markets. By this I mean two things. First, we must lessen our dependence on the USA. Most of our trade goes there but the Americans have decided, in the last few years, to ignore our international trade treaties. Europe is the key to breaking our dependence. Second, the way to break into the European markets is to sell different products. We need to aggressively promote our organic agriculture and find new ways of making it affordable to farmers. One such way is to offer a fair trade label. It would guarantee a constant, livable price for farmers for their products and consumers could choose to support them, or large business. With an aggressive marketing strategy, this market stands to gain tremendously, as other fair trade markets have: around 10% per year.

We have the opportunity to help our farmers. The other 3 parties offer different ways of ignoring our farmers' concerns. We can dismantle supply management; we can dismantle export markets; we can dismantle income support. The NDP doesn't want to do these things. We want to support our farmers. We think we should say a strong no to the other parties who put all other concerns before those of the farmers.