![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Getting political for a moment.
Sep. 28th, 2010 09:01 amWorth a celebration.
Now, I'm not much of a political animal, but after the blunders that the Liberals made over the padt while, I'm glad to see the back of them.
But the government's ill-fated plan to sell NB Power to Hydro-Quebec attracted the most controversy. The $4.8-billion deal was eventually renegotiated then shelved amid howls of public outrage.
The move was a key part of Graham's ambitious plan to make the province financially self-sufficient within 20 years. Though the sale would have wiped out a large chunk of the province's $8.4-billion debt, critics condemned the plan as a short-term fix that would leave the province with little control over electricity rates.
I myself was pretty ticked off when I first heard about their decision to sell NB Power to another province in order to pay off a chunk of provincial debt. For one thing, that puts control of electricity rates in the hands of people who are removed from the people they're actually giving service to, which means that they themselves wouldn't be affected if, say, they felt like raising rates by 20% just because they can. It also seems a bit backwards to make a move like that if they want to make this province self-sufficient within 20 years. Yeah, let's make it self-sufficient by giving other people control of our power... What were they planning to do, buy it back when the time was right?
Spooked by public protests, the Liberals flip-flopped on several initiatives, including bids to merge post-secondary campuses, scrap early French immersion in English schools, cut ferry services and lay off school support workers.
What they don't say in this paragraph is that not only did they plan to scrap the early French Immersion program, but they wanted to do it while at the same time claiming that they wanted more people to graduate from high school with enough skill in French to raise the rates of bilingualism in New Brunswick. They planned to do this not by making French a mandatory class all the way through high school, the way English and math is, but by making it mandatory that all elementary students spend 6 months of a certain grade year (can't remember which one right now) in a sort of short-term French Immersion environment.
Yes, they planned to increase bilingualism by making sure that students had less time to learn the language. Yeah, I can see that plan working really well...
As well, the premier promised to provide laptop computers to the province's 61,000 middle and high school students — a commitment his rivals dismissed as too extravagant.
This was a recent promise, and something that made my jaw drop. There is no way in which this is a good idea, practically speaking. First of all, there are more than 61000 students in New Brunswick in junior high and high school, which will mean that the better schools get their pick of the laptops and the rest just have to deal with things as they've always been. Which means that even if the ideal situation happened and access to laptop increased student knowledge, schools in poorer areas would lag even further behind big rich schools in cities, widening the gap between the rich and the poor.
Second problem - Are the schools just going to let students take these laptops home with them? If so, parents are likely to be the ones to fork over a hefty deposit to ensure the laptop's safety, and student fees are already higher than they need to be because 90% of the money goes to support the damn sports teams. If not, then students don't need laptops, they need desktops, and bigger computer labs. And they don't actually need those in the first place.
Then there's the logistics of whether it'll fall on the schools or the government to replace the laptops when they inevitably fail or break. It's not going to be just a 1-time purchase if they want to do it seriously. It'll involve maintenance. And if it'll fall on the schools to pick up the bill, well, let me just say this: when I was at high school, a little less than a decade ago, nearly all of the textbooks there were 30 years old, some of them falling apart to the point where the teachers would not allow them to be taken home with the students. And I went to one of the better high schools in the city, possibly the best one. Schools need to be able to replace their damn textbooks before they need to worry about replacing pointless laptops.
This is the first time in my life where I wished that I was eligible to vote. There's actually a party that has my interests at heart. The Green party may not be huge or popular, but they're slowly increasing in popularity, and they at least acknowledge things like the fact that someone working full-time hours cannot properly support themselves unless they live in cheap slums. None of the other parties in the running addressed the issue of the working poor. Some tried to throw some red herrings into the mix, saying, "Party A only cares about the rich, Party B is interested only in the middle class, so vote Party C," without saying if Party C gives a damn about the working poor at all. (Turns out that the party that put up those signs didn't actually care, at least according to their campaign materials and promises.) But this little up-and-coming group actually recognizes that people in my situation exist and that it's problematic for us. Even if they can't do anything to change it, it's nice to know that there's some acknowledgement.
So yeah, if I could have voted, I'd have voted for them. Some people may say that it's throwing your vote away to vote for any party but the two main ones (ie: the ones who are pretty much the only ones who have a chance of getting into power), but I say otherwise. It's throwing your vote away if you only vote for the winning teams because they're the winning team, not because you believe in them.
Besides, Canada's government works in such a way that even parties who didn't get into power still can have a say, because if enough people voted for them to have a presence, they get seats in parliament even if their party isn't in the majority.
(I also like that the Green Party recognizes this: Because so many Arts and Culture workers are self-employed they do not qualify for EI benefits, CPP or for Worker’s Compensation. To add insult to injury, in a year when an artist does experience a substantial increase in income by gaining a grant, selling an unusual quantity of work or publications, or by winning a prize, the artist is taxed fully on the gain as if it were pure income, with no consideration for averaging the lean years that have preceded or will follow. Sale of a work in one year that required previous years of labour and investment is not considered a return on a long term investment; instead it’s taxed as a windfall. I know more than a few artists who have had to struggle with this situation. The Green Party doesn't say they can fix that problem, but again, the fact that they acknowledge it as a problem speaks well for them, in my mind.)
Now, I'm not much of a political animal, but after the blunders that the Liberals made over the padt while, I'm glad to see the back of them.
But the government's ill-fated plan to sell NB Power to Hydro-Quebec attracted the most controversy. The $4.8-billion deal was eventually renegotiated then shelved amid howls of public outrage.
The move was a key part of Graham's ambitious plan to make the province financially self-sufficient within 20 years. Though the sale would have wiped out a large chunk of the province's $8.4-billion debt, critics condemned the plan as a short-term fix that would leave the province with little control over electricity rates.
I myself was pretty ticked off when I first heard about their decision to sell NB Power to another province in order to pay off a chunk of provincial debt. For one thing, that puts control of electricity rates in the hands of people who are removed from the people they're actually giving service to, which means that they themselves wouldn't be affected if, say, they felt like raising rates by 20% just because they can. It also seems a bit backwards to make a move like that if they want to make this province self-sufficient within 20 years. Yeah, let's make it self-sufficient by giving other people control of our power... What were they planning to do, buy it back when the time was right?
Spooked by public protests, the Liberals flip-flopped on several initiatives, including bids to merge post-secondary campuses, scrap early French immersion in English schools, cut ferry services and lay off school support workers.
What they don't say in this paragraph is that not only did they plan to scrap the early French Immersion program, but they wanted to do it while at the same time claiming that they wanted more people to graduate from high school with enough skill in French to raise the rates of bilingualism in New Brunswick. They planned to do this not by making French a mandatory class all the way through high school, the way English and math is, but by making it mandatory that all elementary students spend 6 months of a certain grade year (can't remember which one right now) in a sort of short-term French Immersion environment.
Yes, they planned to increase bilingualism by making sure that students had less time to learn the language. Yeah, I can see that plan working really well...
As well, the premier promised to provide laptop computers to the province's 61,000 middle and high school students — a commitment his rivals dismissed as too extravagant.
This was a recent promise, and something that made my jaw drop. There is no way in which this is a good idea, practically speaking. First of all, there are more than 61000 students in New Brunswick in junior high and high school, which will mean that the better schools get their pick of the laptops and the rest just have to deal with things as they've always been. Which means that even if the ideal situation happened and access to laptop increased student knowledge, schools in poorer areas would lag even further behind big rich schools in cities, widening the gap between the rich and the poor.
Second problem - Are the schools just going to let students take these laptops home with them? If so, parents are likely to be the ones to fork over a hefty deposit to ensure the laptop's safety, and student fees are already higher than they need to be because 90% of the money goes to support the damn sports teams. If not, then students don't need laptops, they need desktops, and bigger computer labs. And they don't actually need those in the first place.
Then there's the logistics of whether it'll fall on the schools or the government to replace the laptops when they inevitably fail or break. It's not going to be just a 1-time purchase if they want to do it seriously. It'll involve maintenance. And if it'll fall on the schools to pick up the bill, well, let me just say this: when I was at high school, a little less than a decade ago, nearly all of the textbooks there were 30 years old, some of them falling apart to the point where the teachers would not allow them to be taken home with the students. And I went to one of the better high schools in the city, possibly the best one. Schools need to be able to replace their damn textbooks before they need to worry about replacing pointless laptops.
This is the first time in my life where I wished that I was eligible to vote. There's actually a party that has my interests at heart. The Green party may not be huge or popular, but they're slowly increasing in popularity, and they at least acknowledge things like the fact that someone working full-time hours cannot properly support themselves unless they live in cheap slums. None of the other parties in the running addressed the issue of the working poor. Some tried to throw some red herrings into the mix, saying, "Party A only cares about the rich, Party B is interested only in the middle class, so vote Party C," without saying if Party C gives a damn about the working poor at all. (Turns out that the party that put up those signs didn't actually care, at least according to their campaign materials and promises.) But this little up-and-coming group actually recognizes that people in my situation exist and that it's problematic for us. Even if they can't do anything to change it, it's nice to know that there's some acknowledgement.
So yeah, if I could have voted, I'd have voted for them. Some people may say that it's throwing your vote away to vote for any party but the two main ones (ie: the ones who are pretty much the only ones who have a chance of getting into power), but I say otherwise. It's throwing your vote away if you only vote for the winning teams because they're the winning team, not because you believe in them.
Besides, Canada's government works in such a way that even parties who didn't get into power still can have a say, because if enough people voted for them to have a presence, they get seats in parliament even if their party isn't in the majority.
(I also like that the Green Party recognizes this: Because so many Arts and Culture workers are self-employed they do not qualify for EI benefits, CPP or for Worker’s Compensation. To add insult to injury, in a year when an artist does experience a substantial increase in income by gaining a grant, selling an unusual quantity of work or publications, or by winning a prize, the artist is taxed fully on the gain as if it were pure income, with no consideration for averaging the lean years that have preceded or will follow. Sale of a work in one year that required previous years of labour and investment is not considered a return on a long term investment; instead it’s taxed as a windfall. I know more than a few artists who have had to struggle with this situation. The Green Party doesn't say they can fix that problem, but again, the fact that they acknowledge it as a problem speaks well for them, in my mind.)