Lead poisoning.
A few decades ago, in North America, we began to recognize the necessity to reduce exposure to lead. The result was a phasing out of lead-based gasoline and lead-based paint -- two substances that, at the time, continued to use the heavy metal in the production of its product. The reason was lead increased the health problems of those exposed to consumer products that contained the heavy metal.
However, it appears that the attributes that once made lead attractive (easy workability, low melting point and corrosion resistance) have once again made it the metal du jour for cheap trinkets and jewelery -- particularly pieces worn and abused by young girls.
Herein lies the problem. The fact is that outside of occupational hazards the majority of lead poisoning occurs in children under age twelve. The main sources of poisoning are from ingestion of lead. This ingestion used to occur when contaminated soil (from leaded gasoline) was prevelant or when lead dust or chips from deteriorating lead-based paints were present. While restrictions and laws have been inacted in order to deal with these potential lead poisoning sources (in most American states, landlords and those selling such houses are required to inform the potential residents of the danger of lead poisoning in older houses due to paint chipping etc.) the fact is our governments are slow moving in dealing with the overall use of lead in consumer products.
Enter the developing market. In an effort to cash in on the North American consumerism cash cow, many developing nations are finding easier, cheaper and faster alternative ingrediants for consumer products. As such, lead has been reintroduced into consumer products in everything from make-up, jewelery and cheap, trinket toys.
In a story in the Globe & Mail today, Health Canada came out with a warning that several children's necklaces (and other trinkets) had to be recalled from two retailers due to high lead levels.
Kathleen Cooper, senior researcher at the Canadian Environmental Law Association, is not surprised. "Lead jewellery is as plentiful as pennies because there are no regulations regarding the use of lead."
Cooper explains that the only regulation the Canadian government has erected is to prohibit the use of lead in children's jewellery -- children being anyone under the age of 15. The problem is, Cooper explains, nobody makes an age distinction when purchasing costume jewellery. So jewellery with lead can be sold to anyone despite the restrictions. Cooper is appalled that the rational behind the Canadian government's last decision not to regulate lead in consumer based products -- including jewellery -- was due to the "unfair economic impact it would have on costume jewellery." Cooper is insistent that in order to reduce the exposure and the subsequent health risks due to lead poisoning, the Canadian government MUST enact strict regulations regarding the sale of domestic and international consumer products that contain lead.
While these regulations are not yet forthcoming, Health Canada is asking Claire's and Ardene stores to remove various items that contained lead. Health Canada's rationale is the risk of lead poisoning to children if they chew or suck on the items, or if they swallow them.
For further information, consumers can contact the Health Canada product safety office at 1-866-662-0666.
For more information on lead poisoning go to:
http://www.cmaj.ca/cgi/content/full/171/5/429-a
Thursday, January 04, 2007
Wednesday, January 03, 2007
Community is the key
It's the year of 007...and I'm about to throw around pop-culture psycho-babble like it actually matters. Thing is, I think it really does.
Now, I'm not one for self-help. I don't read Chicken Soups for any soul, nor to do I peruse the people from different planets (Mars or Venus), but a few years ago I did stumble upon a rather interesting book. It was by an American psychiatrist that had spent much of his formative professional years in service to the American military. From this experience (and from his own incite) he began to formulate a philosophy that focuses upon the necessity for the truthful development of love and community.
Community is an oft-abused word. In many cases it is used to create divisions, to define differences and, at times, to condemn segments of people. Yet, in modern times, no one concept or word has ever been so present in our day-to-day lives. Community dominates our work life, our home life and even our entertainment hours (what community are you a part of while surfing on this, here, inter-web???).
Yet, despite the pervasive nature of this aspect of humanity, community is often misunderstood and ill-defined. It is at this point that the self-help wisdom of Scott Peck enters the picture. According to Peck, any group that wishes to become a community must undertake a communal journey that involves four stages:
*pseudocommunity -- where "niceness" reigns
*chaos -- when the emotional skeletons of individuals and segments crawl out of the closet
*emptiness -- a time of quiet and transition
*true community -- marked both by deep honesty and deep caring
Peck outlines this concept (and the subject) in his 1987 book, The Different Drum: Community Making and Peace (Simon and Schuster). In this, and any of th other Peck bestsellers, he mixes his poignant incite with examples and rational explanations as to why it is so important for us -- as the human race -- to develop and nurture community.
Regardless of whether you agree with Peck's description or not, the fact remains that in this day and age of division and strife, community has become an important and necessary aspect for peace and sustainability. Community defines who we are, what rights we are entitled to and what protections we can expect. Community also helps us grow and develop as individuals -- allowing all the little punk-rockers a chance to rebel, even as the suits choose to conform.
The problem is too many people ignore the integral part of community that demands honesty, open-mindedness and willingness. These principles (these traits) allow people -- all people -- to move from a state of insufferable "niceness" (where everyone gets along and no one is really real -- just think of the past holiday season:), to the chaotic stages of changing boundaries, perspectives and expectations, to a sense of loss (that comes from not getting OUR way), to the final stage of appreciation, acceptance and (dare I say it) respect.
Because in the end, there can be no community without respect and respect can only be attained through persistence and growth -- NOT through forcing person(s) to conform to our own (limited) standards.
So, why, in the year of 007, do I say all of this? Because now, more than ever, we need to stop glossing over the idea of community. We need to stop assuming that any community we belong to, participate in, or affiliate with MUST conform to every principle and value we hold. Despite how great we all believe our values to be (and how right, how righteous, and how rational) our perspectives and our views are these beliefs are not superior to anyone else's beliefs. Period.
That means we, all of we, have to make a decision to deal with the uncomfortable feelings that occur when we grow and learn as a community -- when we push the boundaries, question the status quo and then opt for the straight and narrow. Because in the end community is about love and acceptance, both for ourselves and for others.
Now, I'm not one for self-help. I don't read Chicken Soups for any soul, nor to do I peruse the people from different planets (Mars or Venus), but a few years ago I did stumble upon a rather interesting book. It was by an American psychiatrist that had spent much of his formative professional years in service to the American military. From this experience (and from his own incite) he began to formulate a philosophy that focuses upon the necessity for the truthful development of love and community.
Community is an oft-abused word. In many cases it is used to create divisions, to define differences and, at times, to condemn segments of people. Yet, in modern times, no one concept or word has ever been so present in our day-to-day lives. Community dominates our work life, our home life and even our entertainment hours (what community are you a part of while surfing on this, here, inter-web???).
Yet, despite the pervasive nature of this aspect of humanity, community is often misunderstood and ill-defined. It is at this point that the self-help wisdom of Scott Peck enters the picture. According to Peck, any group that wishes to become a community must undertake a communal journey that involves four stages:
*pseudocommunity -- where "niceness" reigns
*chaos -- when the emotional skeletons of individuals and segments crawl out of the closet
*emptiness -- a time of quiet and transition
*true community -- marked both by deep honesty and deep caring
Peck outlines this concept (and the subject) in his 1987 book, The Different Drum: Community Making and Peace (Simon and Schuster). In this, and any of th other Peck bestsellers, he mixes his poignant incite with examples and rational explanations as to why it is so important for us -- as the human race -- to develop and nurture community.
Regardless of whether you agree with Peck's description or not, the fact remains that in this day and age of division and strife, community has become an important and necessary aspect for peace and sustainability. Community defines who we are, what rights we are entitled to and what protections we can expect. Community also helps us grow and develop as individuals -- allowing all the little punk-rockers a chance to rebel, even as the suits choose to conform.
The problem is too many people ignore the integral part of community that demands honesty, open-mindedness and willingness. These principles (these traits) allow people -- all people -- to move from a state of insufferable "niceness" (where everyone gets along and no one is really real -- just think of the past holiday season:), to the chaotic stages of changing boundaries, perspectives and expectations, to a sense of loss (that comes from not getting OUR way), to the final stage of appreciation, acceptance and (dare I say it) respect.
Because in the end, there can be no community without respect and respect can only be attained through persistence and growth -- NOT through forcing person(s) to conform to our own (limited) standards.
So, why, in the year of 007, do I say all of this? Because now, more than ever, we need to stop glossing over the idea of community. We need to stop assuming that any community we belong to, participate in, or affiliate with MUST conform to every principle and value we hold. Despite how great we all believe our values to be (and how right, how righteous, and how rational) our perspectives and our views are these beliefs are not superior to anyone else's beliefs. Period.
That means we, all of we, have to make a decision to deal with the uncomfortable feelings that occur when we grow and learn as a community -- when we push the boundaries, question the status quo and then opt for the straight and narrow. Because in the end community is about love and acceptance, both for ourselves and for others.
Tuesday, January 02, 2007
I resolve....One Day at a Time
Is it just me or is it getting harder to make New Year's resolutions? Gone are the days when simple self-improvement sufficed. Now, in a media-rich and information savvy culture our resolutions take on a new timber. We look outwards (and perhaps upwards) and realized that personal development, although noble, can lack a global perspective. How can losing weight help decrease the gap between the haves and have-nots? How can making our own lunches help with species extinction or global warming? So, perhaps we need to look past the guilted-into-action strategies and focus on something else? But what?
M. Ryan Hess, author of the Ten Minute Activist: Easy Ways to Take Back the Planet, advises us to address this dilemma by thinking small. Using this strategy Hess, along with a five-member Mission Collective, has published a rather small (pocket-sized) book that outlines 150 ideas to "take life down a notch -- and take ten for the planet."
While books like these can often read as meditations (or sermons -- depending on your perspective) they can offer the impetous for people ready and willing to make changes but unaware of how to go about the shift. A few of the suggestions are so commonplace -- such as properly inflating your tires, or planting a tree -- that they almost appear ridiculously simple; however, by reframing them as part of a conscious resolution, a deliberate action to become a socially conscious activist, Hess and his crew helps to get every day, ordinary people to re-examine how small acts can add up to large results.
Whether it's this book or another, the hope us that each person's reinvigorated activism will become a habit -- something good for you and the planet that you can do everyday.
So before you make the list; before you resolve to better your health, your appearance or your bank account; scan the options and examine the impact. It is possible to help yourself, your planet and your global community one small action at a time.
Books to look out for:
1) Michael Norton's: 365 Ways to Change the World: How to Make a Difference -- One Day at a Time (also go online to www.365act.com)
2) M. Ryan Hess: The Ten Minute Activist: Easy Ways to Take Back the Planet
3) Christof Mauch: Shades of Green: Environment Activism Around the Globe
4) Michael R. Stevenson: Everyday Activism; A Handbook for Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual People and their Allies": A handbook for Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual People and their Allies
M. Ryan Hess, author of the Ten Minute Activist: Easy Ways to Take Back the Planet, advises us to address this dilemma by thinking small. Using this strategy Hess, along with a five-member Mission Collective, has published a rather small (pocket-sized) book that outlines 150 ideas to "take life down a notch -- and take ten for the planet."
While books like these can often read as meditations (or sermons -- depending on your perspective) they can offer the impetous for people ready and willing to make changes but unaware of how to go about the shift. A few of the suggestions are so commonplace -- such as properly inflating your tires, or planting a tree -- that they almost appear ridiculously simple; however, by reframing them as part of a conscious resolution, a deliberate action to become a socially conscious activist, Hess and his crew helps to get every day, ordinary people to re-examine how small acts can add up to large results.
Whether it's this book or another, the hope us that each person's reinvigorated activism will become a habit -- something good for you and the planet that you can do everyday.
So before you make the list; before you resolve to better your health, your appearance or your bank account; scan the options and examine the impact. It is possible to help yourself, your planet and your global community one small action at a time.
Books to look out for:
1) Michael Norton's: 365 Ways to Change the World: How to Make a Difference -- One Day at a Time (also go online to www.365act.com)
2) M. Ryan Hess: The Ten Minute Activist: Easy Ways to Take Back the Planet
3) Christof Mauch: Shades of Green: Environment Activism Around the Globe
4) Michael R. Stevenson: Everyday Activism; A Handbook for Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual People and their Allies": A handbook for Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual People and their Allies
Friday, December 15, 2006
A green goal and removal of a stole -- it's all about the game of footie
Well, it's happened. Even the iconic FIFA organization is now marked by environmental social strife. Not that the world's pre-eminant soccer organization is upset with changes (in fact, it's not even responsible for the changes). Yet, the recent grumblings of Iranian women and the recent pledges by the South African government is cause for pause in the mighty footie realm.
So, what do I mean?
A recent petition demands that FIFA president, Mr Joseph S. Blatter, put pressure on the Iranian government to allow women into the stadium to watch the world's most international sport. The petition states that women are currently banned from participating (as observors) in Iran's participation in FIFA games -- and this exclusion prevents them from enjoying the inclusion of a culturally relevant past-time.
At present (and as any good theoretically a-political organization would do) FIFA is not weighing in on the debate. Rather, it is stepping back and taking the "we don't influence" politics approach -- an approach that simply does not exist in today's climate.
And speaking of climate -- while FIFA may be reluctant to engage in politics with the Iranian government it cannot avoid this aspect of international sports when dealing with the South African government.
In 2010 South Africa will host the FIFA Soccer World Cup -- an event that draws the attention of billions from all over the world. As a result the South African government has pledged to raise awareness (and standards) on water and energy conservation -- in an effort to green the game.
"We are committed to ensuring that South Africa learns from the Green Goal experience which vastly reduced the environmental impact of the 2006 World Cup in Germany," said Minister of Environmental Affairs and Tourism Marthinus van Schalkwyk.
Hmmm, footie really is political -- whether the FIFA realize this or not.
For more information on the Iranian petition go to:
http://www.petitiononline.com/FIFAban/petition.html
For more information on FIFA go to:
http://access.fifa.com/en/article/0,0000,110908,00.html
For more information on South Africa's pledge for a green World Cup go to:
http://allafrica.com/stories/200612140740.html
So, what do I mean?
A recent petition demands that FIFA president, Mr Joseph S. Blatter, put pressure on the Iranian government to allow women into the stadium to watch the world's most international sport. The petition states that women are currently banned from participating (as observors) in Iran's participation in FIFA games -- and this exclusion prevents them from enjoying the inclusion of a culturally relevant past-time.
At present (and as any good theoretically a-political organization would do) FIFA is not weighing in on the debate. Rather, it is stepping back and taking the "we don't influence" politics approach -- an approach that simply does not exist in today's climate.
And speaking of climate -- while FIFA may be reluctant to engage in politics with the Iranian government it cannot avoid this aspect of international sports when dealing with the South African government.
In 2010 South Africa will host the FIFA Soccer World Cup -- an event that draws the attention of billions from all over the world. As a result the South African government has pledged to raise awareness (and standards) on water and energy conservation -- in an effort to green the game.
"We are committed to ensuring that South Africa learns from the Green Goal experience which vastly reduced the environmental impact of the 2006 World Cup in Germany," said Minister of Environmental Affairs and Tourism Marthinus van Schalkwyk.
Hmmm, footie really is political -- whether the FIFA realize this or not.
For more information on the Iranian petition go to:
http://www.petitiononline.com/FIFAban/petition.html
For more information on FIFA go to:
http://access.fifa.com/en/article/0,0000,110908,00.html
For more information on South Africa's pledge for a green World Cup go to:
http://allafrica.com/stories/200612140740.html
Thursday, December 14, 2006
Wal-Mart and Christian values go head to head in holiday season
Oh dear! It appears that Wal-Mart is acting in an un-Christian-like manner, or so say 130 pastors south of the border.
In an effort to draw attention to the low employment standards at the international mega-store, these 130 pastors formed a union-backed lobby group known as WakeUpWalMart.com. This newly formed organization sent a letter asking Wal-Mart's chief executive officer, Lee Scott, to provide higher standards to Wal-Mart employees and their families. The lobby group also released a new television ad featuring Pastor Joe Phelps of Highland Baptist Church in Louisville, Kentucky, asking, "Would Jesus shop at Wal-Mart? Should you?" The pastor continues by asking, "can we continue to shop at Wal-Mart without insulting God?" He goes on to list allegations that Wal-Mart has violated child labor laws and engaged in gender-based discrimination and says half the company's 1.3 million U.S. employees aren't covered under the company health plan. The ad is set to run in 43 media markets.
In response to the advertisement Wal-Mart spokesman Dave Tovar said the United ad and its supporters are backing negative attacks while Wal-Mart is creating jobs.
"The fact is, union leadership is wasting millions of its members' dollars on a failing campaign against a company that is good for working families," Tovar said.
Of course, the un-Christian like employment practices of Wal-Mart cannot stop the buying blitz scheduled for next week. The mega-store announced yesterday that last-minute holiday shoppers will get a chance to shop at Wal-Mart Canada round the clock. While the books show it's an effort to boost the retail giant's year-end sales, the move affects 51 select stores across the nation starting on Monday. The round-the-clock sale will last until Dec. 24 -- a Sunday, ironically enough.
For more information go to:
http://wakeupwalmart.com/
http://www.cbc.ca/canada/edmonton/story/2006/12/13/walmart-shopping.html
In an effort to draw attention to the low employment standards at the international mega-store, these 130 pastors formed a union-backed lobby group known as WakeUpWalMart.com. This newly formed organization sent a letter asking Wal-Mart's chief executive officer, Lee Scott, to provide higher standards to Wal-Mart employees and their families. The lobby group also released a new television ad featuring Pastor Joe Phelps of Highland Baptist Church in Louisville, Kentucky, asking, "Would Jesus shop at Wal-Mart? Should you?" The pastor continues by asking, "can we continue to shop at Wal-Mart without insulting God?" He goes on to list allegations that Wal-Mart has violated child labor laws and engaged in gender-based discrimination and says half the company's 1.3 million U.S. employees aren't covered under the company health plan. The ad is set to run in 43 media markets.
In response to the advertisement Wal-Mart spokesman Dave Tovar said the United ad and its supporters are backing negative attacks while Wal-Mart is creating jobs.
"The fact is, union leadership is wasting millions of its members' dollars on a failing campaign against a company that is good for working families," Tovar said.
Of course, the un-Christian like employment practices of Wal-Mart cannot stop the buying blitz scheduled for next week. The mega-store announced yesterday that last-minute holiday shoppers will get a chance to shop at Wal-Mart Canada round the clock. While the books show it's an effort to boost the retail giant's year-end sales, the move affects 51 select stores across the nation starting on Monday. The round-the-clock sale will last until Dec. 24 -- a Sunday, ironically enough.
For more information go to:
http://wakeupwalmart.com/
http://www.cbc.ca/canada/edmonton/story/2006/12/13/walmart-shopping.html
Wednesday, December 13, 2006
Lego my bagel -- online petition targetting Dempsters
Hello mates,
It's time again to take the ol' mouse and click with your conscience.
On Metro Morning (CBC) this morning, two young women are calling on Canadians to reduce packaging -- their target (an example only) is a new product by Dempsters.
The new product is a bagel wrapped in hard packaging with diner-style sachets of peanut butter and a plastic knife (all individually wrapped) -- and all of this is triple-wrapped.
Talk about obsessive packaging (and an extraordinary waste). Talk about the rise and rise and rise of our solid waste ( -- wait! Didn't Toronto already go through an ordeal regarding solid waste...did we not learn that disposal is a problem and that reduce, reuse and recycle is essential?).
As a result Amy Nugent and Morwenna White have taken up the fight to reduce packaging. They have started an online petition calling on the government to implement standards and regulations regarding packaging. Their argument (and it is valid) is that voluntary regulation DOES NOT work. Period. And that is true. There are a variety of examples all across the consumer-minefield.
They are also asking people to mail their Dempster bagel back the president of the company. The address is listed on the first layer of packaging.
For the online petition go to: http://www.petitiononline.com/PKGREG/petition.html
It's time again to take the ol' mouse and click with your conscience.
On Metro Morning (CBC) this morning, two young women are calling on Canadians to reduce packaging -- their target (an example only) is a new product by Dempsters.
The new product is a bagel wrapped in hard packaging with diner-style sachets of peanut butter and a plastic knife (all individually wrapped) -- and all of this is triple-wrapped.
Talk about obsessive packaging (and an extraordinary waste). Talk about the rise and rise and rise of our solid waste ( -- wait! Didn't Toronto already go through an ordeal regarding solid waste...did we not learn that disposal is a problem and that reduce, reuse and recycle is essential?).
As a result Amy Nugent and Morwenna White have taken up the fight to reduce packaging. They have started an online petition calling on the government to implement standards and regulations regarding packaging. Their argument (and it is valid) is that voluntary regulation DOES NOT work. Period. And that is true. There are a variety of examples all across the consumer-minefield.
They are also asking people to mail their Dempster bagel back the president of the company. The address is listed on the first layer of packaging.
For the online petition go to: http://www.petitiononline.com/PKGREG/petition.html
Tuesday, December 12, 2006
Green travel getting a new boost from airlines
Travel.
It's fun; it's exciting; it's alluring; yet, to the mean green in all of us, it's a conundrum.
Travelling requires the use of carbon fuels, which, we all know, is a main contributer to green house gases and global warming. Unfortunately, the worst offender of this output is airline travel.
Yet, we live in a global world -- a world where families really do exist on either side of the pond and relaxation time really does include an escape to sun and surf.
So, how, then, can a green consumer make friendlier choices when it comes to travel -- in particular air travel?
According to PlanetSave (a web portal with green ideas for everyday living) we do have options. While the environment is not the main impetus for changing airline policy, the rising cost of oil (and the subsequent shrinking profit margin) IS enough to cause airlines all over the world to re-examine their methods of operation.
As such, PlanetSave believes that airlines have founder simple and safe ways to reduce their fuel burn, and thus their emissions. Solutions, such as winglets added to the aircraft, or flying more direct routes at energy-efficiency altitudes and speeds are methods being adopted by a large number of airlines. As is the eliminatino of excess weight and the use of electric vehicles for ground crew operations.
While all airlines are jumping on the efficiency wagon, PlanetSave does state that Asian and European airlines often have more advanced green programs than their American counterparts (but this is changing thanks to rising oil prices and savvy consumers like yourself). As such, PlanetSave singles out British Airways as a leader in this field of green-travel choices.
The stalwart of luxury travel, British Airways advocates an emissions trading scheme in the industry and has established carbon offsetting and sustainable-tourism initiatives. In the USA, JetBlue is potentially the greenest airline because of its newer, more fuel-efficient fleet and its in-flight recycling and waste-management programs. PlanetSave also gives kudos to American Airlines, Singapore Airlines, and several more for their in-flight recycling programs.
In the end, though, savvy, green travellers can opt for more sustainable choices by taking a few tips:
*Opt for direct flights instead of multiple stops—take-offs and landings are a major source of CO2 emissions.
*Choose an airline with fewer delays while the plane waits for a gate upon arrival, if possible. Planes burn excess fuel while waiting.
*Become a frequent flyer on an airline with a newer, more fuel-efficient fleet such as JetBlue, Singapore Airlines, or Virgin Atlantic.
*Consider purchasing carbon offset credits for the miles you fly.
It's fun; it's exciting; it's alluring; yet, to the mean green in all of us, it's a conundrum.
Travelling requires the use of carbon fuels, which, we all know, is a main contributer to green house gases and global warming. Unfortunately, the worst offender of this output is airline travel.
Yet, we live in a global world -- a world where families really do exist on either side of the pond and relaxation time really does include an escape to sun and surf.
So, how, then, can a green consumer make friendlier choices when it comes to travel -- in particular air travel?
According to PlanetSave (a web portal with green ideas for everyday living) we do have options. While the environment is not the main impetus for changing airline policy, the rising cost of oil (and the subsequent shrinking profit margin) IS enough to cause airlines all over the world to re-examine their methods of operation.
As such, PlanetSave believes that airlines have founder simple and safe ways to reduce their fuel burn, and thus their emissions. Solutions, such as winglets added to the aircraft, or flying more direct routes at energy-efficiency altitudes and speeds are methods being adopted by a large number of airlines. As is the eliminatino of excess weight and the use of electric vehicles for ground crew operations.
While all airlines are jumping on the efficiency wagon, PlanetSave does state that Asian and European airlines often have more advanced green programs than their American counterparts (but this is changing thanks to rising oil prices and savvy consumers like yourself). As such, PlanetSave singles out British Airways as a leader in this field of green-travel choices.
The stalwart of luxury travel, British Airways advocates an emissions trading scheme in the industry and has established carbon offsetting and sustainable-tourism initiatives. In the USA, JetBlue is potentially the greenest airline because of its newer, more fuel-efficient fleet and its in-flight recycling and waste-management programs. PlanetSave also gives kudos to American Airlines, Singapore Airlines, and several more for their in-flight recycling programs.
In the end, though, savvy, green travellers can opt for more sustainable choices by taking a few tips:
*Opt for direct flights instead of multiple stops—take-offs and landings are a major source of CO2 emissions.
*Choose an airline with fewer delays while the plane waits for a gate upon arrival, if possible. Planes burn excess fuel while waiting.
*Become a frequent flyer on an airline with a newer, more fuel-efficient fleet such as JetBlue, Singapore Airlines, or Virgin Atlantic.
*Consider purchasing carbon offset credits for the miles you fly.
Friday, December 08, 2006
Sign, sign, everywhere signs...
Today will be a short post.
It's just an alert for anyone interested or involved in cycling or climate change. There is a petition (online) asking the current Conservative government to put both issues front and forward by endorsing cycling across Canada.
To read the petition or get active go to:
http://www.gopetition.com/online/10170.html
It's just an alert for anyone interested or involved in cycling or climate change. There is a petition (online) asking the current Conservative government to put both issues front and forward by endorsing cycling across Canada.
To read the petition or get active go to:
http://www.gopetition.com/online/10170.html
Thursday, December 07, 2006
Community meals means communion with commonality -- and that's the best sauce for hunger
We all know where any good party ends up: in the kitchen.
The kitchen is a hub -- it's the source of sustenance; a source of warmth and an easy place to find good icebreakers (let's face it, when pushed for conversation, nothing breaks the ice better than a discussion of food and wine).
So, it is with this in mind that I offer you two choices for community kitchen dinners this Friday night.
Community dinners (and subsequently community kitchens) are popping up all across Canada, yet, they are not a new notion. In fact, they are a return to values that were once prevalent in community-oriented cultures -- cultures that, in North America, have been usurped by the cult-of-the-individual. So, in a world of marketing and unauthentic experiences, community dinners are providing urban and rural dwellers with an opportunity to break bread with their extended community.
In Toronto, this Friday, there are two community dinners. The first is the long-standing tradition of Dufferin Grove Park. This community dinner attracts a wide variety of people from all across the neighbourhood (and beyond); as one community member stated, the dinner has helped to rejuvenate the community. For as little as $6 a plate ($5 if you bring your own plate) a person can look forward to a meal filled with locally produced food (purchased from the Farmer's Market held in the same park year round, every Thursday) and prepared onsite in the wood ovens. The second option is across town in Corktown. Again, the neighbours gather and for $5 a person can expect a home-cooked meal and chit-chat with people from every socio-economic and political background (including apolitical!).
Given our anonymous urban lives, these community dinners offer us all a chance to reach out and connect with the very people that deliver our papers, cut our lawns, teach our children and invest our money. They are a meeting point -- as food always is -- that does not rely on labels and schemas, but rather on nurturing and communion. And we could all use a little more communion.
Bring your plate (sustainability matters) and see you there!
The kitchen is a hub -- it's the source of sustenance; a source of warmth and an easy place to find good icebreakers (let's face it, when pushed for conversation, nothing breaks the ice better than a discussion of food and wine).
So, it is with this in mind that I offer you two choices for community kitchen dinners this Friday night.
Community dinners (and subsequently community kitchens) are popping up all across Canada, yet, they are not a new notion. In fact, they are a return to values that were once prevalent in community-oriented cultures -- cultures that, in North America, have been usurped by the cult-of-the-individual. So, in a world of marketing and unauthentic experiences, community dinners are providing urban and rural dwellers with an opportunity to break bread with their extended community.
In Toronto, this Friday, there are two community dinners. The first is the long-standing tradition of Dufferin Grove Park. This community dinner attracts a wide variety of people from all across the neighbourhood (and beyond); as one community member stated, the dinner has helped to rejuvenate the community. For as little as $6 a plate ($5 if you bring your own plate) a person can look forward to a meal filled with locally produced food (purchased from the Farmer's Market held in the same park year round, every Thursday) and prepared onsite in the wood ovens. The second option is across town in Corktown. Again, the neighbours gather and for $5 a person can expect a home-cooked meal and chit-chat with people from every socio-economic and political background (including apolitical!).
Given our anonymous urban lives, these community dinners offer us all a chance to reach out and connect with the very people that deliver our papers, cut our lawns, teach our children and invest our money. They are a meeting point -- as food always is -- that does not rely on labels and schemas, but rather on nurturing and communion. And we could all use a little more communion.
Bring your plate (sustainability matters) and see you there!
Wednesday, December 06, 2006
Women is the N&*$er of the world -- Part 2
Today, I want to provide you a few lists, a bit of perspective and, perhaps, the possibility of change.
The reason? Seventeen years ago one man turned a gun on himself but not before killing 14 women and injuring 13 others at the École Polytechnique de Montréal.
While countless stories will provide his name, background, socio-economic and cultural status as well as intimate details of his suicide note and warped rational for his killing spree, I will refrain from doing this. Instead, I offer you the names of the dead. The direct victims of one man's violent, patriarchial attitudes towards women; one man's example of the desire for dominance and control over the "other half"; one example of the pervasive and prevalent attitude that women are secondary to men -- an attitude that continues to exist around the world.
People Killed
Geneviève Bergeron (b. 1968), civil engineering student.
Hélène Colgan (b. 1966), mechanical engineering student.
Nathalie Croteau (b. 1966), mechanical engineering student.
Barbara Daigneault (b. 1967) mechanical engineering student.
Anne-Marie Edward (b. 1968), chemical engineering student.
Maud Haviernick (b. 1960), materials engineering student.
Maryse Laganière (b. 1964), budget clerk in the École Polytechnique's finance department.
Maryse Leclair (b. 1966), materials engineering student.
Anne-Marie Lemay (b. 1967), mechanical engineering student.
Sonia Pelletier (b. 1961), mechanical engineering student.
Michèle Richard (b. 1968), materials engineering student.
Annie St-Arneault (b. 1966), mechanical engineering student.
Annie Turcotte (b. 1969), materials engineering student.
Barbara Klucznik-Widajewicz (b. 1958), nursing student.
Now, take a moment. Read the list again. And sit with it. Sit with the knowledge that these women were innocent victims of one man's rage. Sit and reflect on the fact that they were punished, not for what they did, but for who they were. Now reflect on the fact that most of us, at least once in our life, will experience this unjustified and unwarranted hate directed at us - to some degree and on some level.
Done?
Good. Now remember how YOU felt when persecuted for being who you were. Recall the anger, the fear, the anguish and the confusion.
Got it?
Then take this into your day. Regardless of who you come across remember that prejudice, of any type, can and does kill. There is no rationalization that can justify hate and violence -- whether it is towards women, the LGBTQ community, Muslims, Christians, Jews, the list goes on. Yet, the only way we can truly break the cycle of us vs. them (differientation that leads to prejudice and hate) is to break down our own barriers and walls. Have courage. Persist. We will get through this.
Of course, for those more practically inclined, there are other actions that can and should be done. One such action is to support the Dec. 10th Campaign.
This campaign calls on all people (and organizations/corporations/institutions) to support the status of women in Canada -- a status, they report, which is seriously threatened. For more information of the Dec. 10th Campaign desires and rationale please scroll below to the declaration.
Finally, please examine the following list. It is the tally of all the women that died this year due to men on women violence in the GTA. The names are varied. The consequences are different. The reason is the same.
Women and Their Children Killed in the GTA in 2006
Yasmin Ashareh, 20
Seema Badhan, 19
Rose Boroja, 54
Colleen Bradley, 59
Kamlesh Dhingra, 58
Audrey Gates, 80
Wendy LaFleche, 41
Victoria LaFleche, 7
Jesse LaFleche, 3
Shao-Sang Liang, 38
Vivian Yuen-Yee Chau, 3
Ian Chau, five months
Dale Cheryl Mapstone, 29
Malena Morales, 31
Meherun Nessa, 35
Natalie Novak, 20
Rosa Peterman, 57
Gwendolyn Pilgrim, 35
Thayalini Subramaniam, 31
Malini Thayakumar, 36
Neruuya Thayakumar, 14
Gnanalakshmi Raman, 29
For more information on the Dec. 10th Campaign go to:
http://www.criaw-icref.ca/index_e.htm
For more information on the Dec. 6th Fund go to:
http://www.dec6fund.ca/what.htm
For more information on supporting the movement to end violence against women go to:
http://www.whiteribbon.ca/
Statement for the December 10th Campaign
For Women’s Equality and Human Rights
On December 10th, International Human Rights Day, Canada will mark the 25th anniversary of its ratification of the UN Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW). Instead of celebrating this historical milestone, women in Canada are mobilizing to ensure that governments honour and respect their international and domestic human rights commitments. This is because over several months now, the federal government has acted in ways that deny most women’s realities, undermine women’s access to justice, and abandon its own obligation to advance women’s human rights in Canada.
Reality Denied
In 2006, the federal government made a number of important changes affecting women’s equality rights. These include a 40% cut to Status of Women Canada and the elimination of twelve regional Status of Women Canada offices. These measures signal a profound rejection of the realities of women’s lives. The justifications for these measures by Minister Beverley Oda are that women are strong, already equal, and don’t need these critical policy and legal supports. Although we acknowledge that women in Canada have won formal equality rights, we know that much more work must be done to make these equality rights a reality for all women in Canada. One indicator of this is women’s wages. On average, women still earn 71 cents on the male dollar, making Canada 38th in the world in terms of the wage gap ratio. Racialized and Aboriginal women earn significantly less. Their average annual income, respectively, is $16, 621 and $ 13,300. Further, even though 70% of mothers are in the paid work force, Canada still does not have in place a national child care program. According to the Toronto Community Foundation, over 10,000 children are on a waiting list for subsidized child care spaces in Toronto alone.
Access Denied
Access to justice is now denied to women on many fronts. In the last year, the federal government abolished the funding for the national child care program, decided not to adopt an improved federal pay equity law, eliminated all funds for the Court Challenges Program, removed the goal of equality from the mandate of the Women’s Program at Status of Women Canada, and prohibited the use of federal funds to engage in advocacy at any level of government, lobbying and most research. Other policy decisions have also contributed to denying women’s access to equality and their rights. Among these are the cuts to literacy programs, the lack of support for women and men who are homeless, the refusal to respect the Kyoto Protocol, the decisions to renege on the Kelowna Accord as well as Canada’s obstruction of the adoption of the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.
Equality Denied
Instead of promoting women’s equality, the federal government is severely hindering: women’s capacity to organize, advocate and lobby. They won’t support women’s equality in the workplace and have limited women’s rights to challenge discrimination before the courts. Canada’s democratic safeguards are indeed being eroded and our internationally acclaimed human rights legacy is seriously in jeopardy.
Respect Your Commitment, Prime Minister Stephen Harper
We, the undersigned, urge Prime Minister Harper to respect his own election commitment to uphold women’s equality and human rights in Canada. During the 2006 election campaign, Mr. Harper stated:
“If elected, I will take concrete and immediate measures, as recommended by the United Nations, to ensure that Canada fully upholds its commitments to women in Canada." (January 18, 2006).
Prime Minister Harper is not respecting this commitment. The government’s approach jeopardizes the historic efforts by Canada to achieve women’s full equality, and disregards women’s human rights here at home. Rather than uphold his commitment to the women in Canada, the Prime Minister has in fact ignored the experience of millions of women in order to justify his government’s actions.
On December 10, we call on the federal Government to:
• Reverse its policy decisions on childcare, pay equity, the Court Challenges Program, Status of Women Canada, and the Women’s program..
• Respect the CEDAW Committee recommendations, by improving the living conditions and respecting the human rights of Aboriginal women, effectively addressing violence against women and women’s poverty, improving maternity and parental benefits, funding civil legal aid, changing immigration laws to respect the rights of live-in caregivers and ensuring a more equitable participation of women in the political institutions.
Women in Canada, because we are strong, determined and passionate, can and will not accept an erosion of their hard won and still fragile equality rights. Women are not living in poverty, as mothers, care-givers or elders, because they are weak or lack self-confidence. They do not choose to become the victims of violence at the hands of partners, family members or strangers. They do not wish to have their children taken from them because of a lack of access to safe and affordable housing. They have not chosen to be under-represented in Canada’s political life, or to be underpaid in countless workplaces across the country. Women, women’s organizations and our allies have chosen, however, to come together to call upon this government to reverse course and promote a collective respect for women’s equality and human rights.
Sincerely,
Aboriginal Women’s Community-Based Studies Initiative
Alliance des femmes de la francophonie canadienne
Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives
Canadian Council of Muslim Women
Canadian Federation of Students
Canadian Federation of University Women
Canadian Feminist Alliance for International Action
Canadian Labour Congress
Canadian Research Institute for the Advancement of Women
Canadian Union of Public Employees
Canadian Women's Community Economic Development Council
Canadian Women’s Foundation
Child Care Advocacy Association of Canada
DAWN Ontario
Fédération des femmes du Québec
Feminists for Just and Equitable Public Policy
MATCH International
National Association of Women and the Law
National Council of Women of Canada
New Brunswick Advisory Council on the Status of Women
Ontario Association of Interval and Transition Houses
Provincial Advisory Council on the Status of Women, Newfoundland and Labrador
Public Service Alliance of Canada
Regroupement provincial des maisons d'hébergement et de transition pour femmes victimes de violence conjugale
Transition House Association of Nova Scotia
Women’s Inter-Church Council of Canada
Women’s Space
YWCA Canada
The reason? Seventeen years ago one man turned a gun on himself but not before killing 14 women and injuring 13 others at the École Polytechnique de Montréal.
While countless stories will provide his name, background, socio-economic and cultural status as well as intimate details of his suicide note and warped rational for his killing spree, I will refrain from doing this. Instead, I offer you the names of the dead. The direct victims of one man's violent, patriarchial attitudes towards women; one man's example of the desire for dominance and control over the "other half"; one example of the pervasive and prevalent attitude that women are secondary to men -- an attitude that continues to exist around the world.
People Killed
Geneviève Bergeron (b. 1968), civil engineering student.
Hélène Colgan (b. 1966), mechanical engineering student.
Nathalie Croteau (b. 1966), mechanical engineering student.
Barbara Daigneault (b. 1967) mechanical engineering student.
Anne-Marie Edward (b. 1968), chemical engineering student.
Maud Haviernick (b. 1960), materials engineering student.
Maryse Laganière (b. 1964), budget clerk in the École Polytechnique's finance department.
Maryse Leclair (b. 1966), materials engineering student.
Anne-Marie Lemay (b. 1967), mechanical engineering student.
Sonia Pelletier (b. 1961), mechanical engineering student.
Michèle Richard (b. 1968), materials engineering student.
Annie St-Arneault (b. 1966), mechanical engineering student.
Annie Turcotte (b. 1969), materials engineering student.
Barbara Klucznik-Widajewicz (b. 1958), nursing student.
Now, take a moment. Read the list again. And sit with it. Sit with the knowledge that these women were innocent victims of one man's rage. Sit and reflect on the fact that they were punished, not for what they did, but for who they were. Now reflect on the fact that most of us, at least once in our life, will experience this unjustified and unwarranted hate directed at us - to some degree and on some level.
Done?
Good. Now remember how YOU felt when persecuted for being who you were. Recall the anger, the fear, the anguish and the confusion.
Got it?
Then take this into your day. Regardless of who you come across remember that prejudice, of any type, can and does kill. There is no rationalization that can justify hate and violence -- whether it is towards women, the LGBTQ community, Muslims, Christians, Jews, the list goes on. Yet, the only way we can truly break the cycle of us vs. them (differientation that leads to prejudice and hate) is to break down our own barriers and walls. Have courage. Persist. We will get through this.
Of course, for those more practically inclined, there are other actions that can and should be done. One such action is to support the Dec. 10th Campaign.
This campaign calls on all people (and organizations/corporations/institutions) to support the status of women in Canada -- a status, they report, which is seriously threatened. For more information of the Dec. 10th Campaign desires and rationale please scroll below to the declaration.
Finally, please examine the following list. It is the tally of all the women that died this year due to men on women violence in the GTA. The names are varied. The consequences are different. The reason is the same.
Women and Their Children Killed in the GTA in 2006
Yasmin Ashareh, 20
Seema Badhan, 19
Rose Boroja, 54
Colleen Bradley, 59
Kamlesh Dhingra, 58
Audrey Gates, 80
Wendy LaFleche, 41
Victoria LaFleche, 7
Jesse LaFleche, 3
Shao-Sang Liang, 38
Vivian Yuen-Yee Chau, 3
Ian Chau, five months
Dale Cheryl Mapstone, 29
Malena Morales, 31
Meherun Nessa, 35
Natalie Novak, 20
Rosa Peterman, 57
Gwendolyn Pilgrim, 35
Thayalini Subramaniam, 31
Malini Thayakumar, 36
Neruuya Thayakumar, 14
Gnanalakshmi Raman, 29
For more information on the Dec. 10th Campaign go to:
http://www.criaw-icref.ca/index_e.htm
For more information on the Dec. 6th Fund go to:
http://www.dec6fund.ca/what.htm
For more information on supporting the movement to end violence against women go to:
http://www.whiteribbon.ca/
Statement for the December 10th Campaign
For Women’s Equality and Human Rights
On December 10th, International Human Rights Day, Canada will mark the 25th anniversary of its ratification of the UN Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW). Instead of celebrating this historical milestone, women in Canada are mobilizing to ensure that governments honour and respect their international and domestic human rights commitments. This is because over several months now, the federal government has acted in ways that deny most women’s realities, undermine women’s access to justice, and abandon its own obligation to advance women’s human rights in Canada.
Reality Denied
In 2006, the federal government made a number of important changes affecting women’s equality rights. These include a 40% cut to Status of Women Canada and the elimination of twelve regional Status of Women Canada offices. These measures signal a profound rejection of the realities of women’s lives. The justifications for these measures by Minister Beverley Oda are that women are strong, already equal, and don’t need these critical policy and legal supports. Although we acknowledge that women in Canada have won formal equality rights, we know that much more work must be done to make these equality rights a reality for all women in Canada. One indicator of this is women’s wages. On average, women still earn 71 cents on the male dollar, making Canada 38th in the world in terms of the wage gap ratio. Racialized and Aboriginal women earn significantly less. Their average annual income, respectively, is $16, 621 and $ 13,300. Further, even though 70% of mothers are in the paid work force, Canada still does not have in place a national child care program. According to the Toronto Community Foundation, over 10,000 children are on a waiting list for subsidized child care spaces in Toronto alone.
Access Denied
Access to justice is now denied to women on many fronts. In the last year, the federal government abolished the funding for the national child care program, decided not to adopt an improved federal pay equity law, eliminated all funds for the Court Challenges Program, removed the goal of equality from the mandate of the Women’s Program at Status of Women Canada, and prohibited the use of federal funds to engage in advocacy at any level of government, lobbying and most research. Other policy decisions have also contributed to denying women’s access to equality and their rights. Among these are the cuts to literacy programs, the lack of support for women and men who are homeless, the refusal to respect the Kyoto Protocol, the decisions to renege on the Kelowna Accord as well as Canada’s obstruction of the adoption of the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.
Equality Denied
Instead of promoting women’s equality, the federal government is severely hindering: women’s capacity to organize, advocate and lobby. They won’t support women’s equality in the workplace and have limited women’s rights to challenge discrimination before the courts. Canada’s democratic safeguards are indeed being eroded and our internationally acclaimed human rights legacy is seriously in jeopardy.
Respect Your Commitment, Prime Minister Stephen Harper
We, the undersigned, urge Prime Minister Harper to respect his own election commitment to uphold women’s equality and human rights in Canada. During the 2006 election campaign, Mr. Harper stated:
“If elected, I will take concrete and immediate measures, as recommended by the United Nations, to ensure that Canada fully upholds its commitments to women in Canada." (January 18, 2006).
Prime Minister Harper is not respecting this commitment. The government’s approach jeopardizes the historic efforts by Canada to achieve women’s full equality, and disregards women’s human rights here at home. Rather than uphold his commitment to the women in Canada, the Prime Minister has in fact ignored the experience of millions of women in order to justify his government’s actions.
On December 10, we call on the federal Government to:
• Reverse its policy decisions on childcare, pay equity, the Court Challenges Program, Status of Women Canada, and the Women’s program..
• Respect the CEDAW Committee recommendations, by improving the living conditions and respecting the human rights of Aboriginal women, effectively addressing violence against women and women’s poverty, improving maternity and parental benefits, funding civil legal aid, changing immigration laws to respect the rights of live-in caregivers and ensuring a more equitable participation of women in the political institutions.
Women in Canada, because we are strong, determined and passionate, can and will not accept an erosion of their hard won and still fragile equality rights. Women are not living in poverty, as mothers, care-givers or elders, because they are weak or lack self-confidence. They do not choose to become the victims of violence at the hands of partners, family members or strangers. They do not wish to have their children taken from them because of a lack of access to safe and affordable housing. They have not chosen to be under-represented in Canada’s political life, or to be underpaid in countless workplaces across the country. Women, women’s organizations and our allies have chosen, however, to come together to call upon this government to reverse course and promote a collective respect for women’s equality and human rights.
Sincerely,
Aboriginal Women’s Community-Based Studies Initiative
Alliance des femmes de la francophonie canadienne
Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives
Canadian Council of Muslim Women
Canadian Federation of Students
Canadian Federation of University Women
Canadian Feminist Alliance for International Action
Canadian Labour Congress
Canadian Research Institute for the Advancement of Women
Canadian Union of Public Employees
Canadian Women's Community Economic Development Council
Canadian Women’s Foundation
Child Care Advocacy Association of Canada
DAWN Ontario
Fédération des femmes du Québec
Feminists for Just and Equitable Public Policy
MATCH International
National Association of Women and the Law
National Council of Women of Canada
New Brunswick Advisory Council on the Status of Women
Ontario Association of Interval and Transition Houses
Provincial Advisory Council on the Status of Women, Newfoundland and Labrador
Public Service Alliance of Canada
Regroupement provincial des maisons d'hébergement et de transition pour femmes victimes de violence conjugale
Transition House Association of Nova Scotia
Women’s Inter-Church Council of Canada
Women’s Space
YWCA Canada
Tuesday, December 05, 2006
Corporate responsibility is the new black
A few years ago only a couple of hundred multinationals were concerned enough with corporate responsibility to include this aspect of their conduct in annual reports.
This year analysts expect close to 2,000 such reports.
Bluntly put: this is exponential growth.
Andrew Brengle, senior analyst with Boston based KLD Research & Analytics, says that only 15 to 20 percent of these reports will be worth reading. He believes that only this small fraction of reports are thorough and comprehensive enough to provide a clear overview of corporate responsibility.
But the fact remains, more and more businesses realize the importance of ethical and responsible corporate decision-making. In otherwords responsibility and full disclosure is actually good business sense (que the choir, I feel a allehuai moment coming on!).
More and more businesses are attempting to communicate with employees and stakeholders through full disclosure. This move towards transperancy, then, forces companies to examine their decisions; this, in turn, provides impetus for making more responsible, ethical and sustainable decisions.
While Brengle may be right -- that the majority of these reports are simply surface attempts to appear responsible -- the fact still remains: consumers demanded, corporations responded; we care about the process not just about the outcome.
For more information on Brengle and the plethora of corporate responsibility reports go to:
http://www.csmonitor.com/2006/1204/p25s01-wmgn.html
This year analysts expect close to 2,000 such reports.
Bluntly put: this is exponential growth.
Andrew Brengle, senior analyst with Boston based KLD Research & Analytics, says that only 15 to 20 percent of these reports will be worth reading. He believes that only this small fraction of reports are thorough and comprehensive enough to provide a clear overview of corporate responsibility.
But the fact remains, more and more businesses realize the importance of ethical and responsible corporate decision-making. In otherwords responsibility and full disclosure is actually good business sense (que the choir, I feel a allehuai moment coming on!).
More and more businesses are attempting to communicate with employees and stakeholders through full disclosure. This move towards transperancy, then, forces companies to examine their decisions; this, in turn, provides impetus for making more responsible, ethical and sustainable decisions.
While Brengle may be right -- that the majority of these reports are simply surface attempts to appear responsible -- the fact still remains: consumers demanded, corporations responded; we care about the process not just about the outcome.
For more information on Brengle and the plethora of corporate responsibility reports go to:
http://www.csmonitor.com/2006/1204/p25s01-wmgn.html
Monday, December 04, 2006
Ten years later the electric car is reborn
Ten years ago there was a cheaper, quieter, greener and more efficient alternative to the gas-combustable engine.
But we don't really know about it and we don't drive it because ten years ago the major car manufacturers, in conjunction with oil companies, governmental agencies and other lobbiests, set out to destroy the potential of this alternative transportation source.
That was 1996. This is 2006. This week, General Motors announced it is ready to launch a plug-in version of its upcoming two-mode hybrid model: the Saturn VUE Green Line. A plug-in version -- aka: electric car (or, at least, some variation of it).
In 1996, GM fought deep and dirty to destroy the electric car.
In 2006, the Big Three member announced its corporate intentions to expand its alternative fuel options.
So, what happened?
War happened. As did worldwide political unrest. Terrorism happened. As did socialization of the USA's fourth largest oil provider. Awareness happened. As did the momentum and belief in the decades of correlational proof on the human element of global warming.
In otherwords the GM (and perhaps other automakers) are living in a different world than 10 years ago.
In otherwords GM (and other automakers) can no longer make economic decisions based on short-term gain (five, ten, fifteen years is but a blip in a larger life-span). Instead, these major inhibitors and accelerators of transportation industry change have come to realize that to circle the proverbial wagons is to orchestrate one's own demise.
Though good ol' GM should be applauded for being the first major automaker to commit to producing a plug-in hybrid electric vehicle the sense of irony is a bit thick. At least, though, large corps are good foot-in-the-mouth swallowers. GM and other large corporations know that corporate image makeovers and PR games are all part and parcel of doing business in a global economy. So, applause the announcement, in my eyes, should be kept for other, not so large players in this realm.
In my view, applause for GM's decision to create and offer consumer accessible alternatives to the gas-combustable engine should be kept for people like Chris Paine and Jessie Deeter -- the writer/director and producer of Who Killed the Electric Car (an expose on the intentional death of an greener alternative to gas-powered cars in America).
Applause should also be kept for the thousands of Greenpeace activists, supporters and corporate personnel who have consistently drawn the public's attention to environmental issues such as global warming.
Applause should be kept for David Suzuki and all the people involved in his foundation that have kept up the barrage of news, views and data to support the need for a societal shift in how we think, act and feel about the Earth and its resources.
And applause should be kept for all those people, across the globe, that CHOOSE to ride their bike to work, take public transit, refuse to use plastic bags, continue to buy bulk (rather than fancy packaging) and opt for the admittedly rougher, but certainly far greener option of recycled personal hygiene paper products.
These are the true heros -- for without them, major automakers, such as GM, would not be in a position to realize public sentiment and corporate image is far more powerful than a small man with a big stick in an unstable oil-producing country half-way across the world.
For more information on Who Killed the Electric Car go to:
http://www.sonyclassics.com/whokilledtheelectriccar/electric.html
For more information on GM's announcement go to:
http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20061110/AUTO01/611100327/1148
For more information on criticism on Who Killed the Electric Car go to:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Who_Killed_the_Electric_Car%3F
But we don't really know about it and we don't drive it because ten years ago the major car manufacturers, in conjunction with oil companies, governmental agencies and other lobbiests, set out to destroy the potential of this alternative transportation source.
That was 1996. This is 2006. This week, General Motors announced it is ready to launch a plug-in version of its upcoming two-mode hybrid model: the Saturn VUE Green Line. A plug-in version -- aka: electric car (or, at least, some variation of it).
In 1996, GM fought deep and dirty to destroy the electric car.
In 2006, the Big Three member announced its corporate intentions to expand its alternative fuel options.
So, what happened?
War happened. As did worldwide political unrest. Terrorism happened. As did socialization of the USA's fourth largest oil provider. Awareness happened. As did the momentum and belief in the decades of correlational proof on the human element of global warming.
In otherwords the GM (and perhaps other automakers) are living in a different world than 10 years ago.
In otherwords GM (and other automakers) can no longer make economic decisions based on short-term gain (five, ten, fifteen years is but a blip in a larger life-span). Instead, these major inhibitors and accelerators of transportation industry change have come to realize that to circle the proverbial wagons is to orchestrate one's own demise.
Though good ol' GM should be applauded for being the first major automaker to commit to producing a plug-in hybrid electric vehicle the sense of irony is a bit thick. At least, though, large corps are good foot-in-the-mouth swallowers. GM and other large corporations know that corporate image makeovers and PR games are all part and parcel of doing business in a global economy. So, applause the announcement, in my eyes, should be kept for other, not so large players in this realm.
In my view, applause for GM's decision to create and offer consumer accessible alternatives to the gas-combustable engine should be kept for people like Chris Paine and Jessie Deeter -- the writer/director and producer of Who Killed the Electric Car (an expose on the intentional death of an greener alternative to gas-powered cars in America).
Applause should also be kept for the thousands of Greenpeace activists, supporters and corporate personnel who have consistently drawn the public's attention to environmental issues such as global warming.
Applause should be kept for David Suzuki and all the people involved in his foundation that have kept up the barrage of news, views and data to support the need for a societal shift in how we think, act and feel about the Earth and its resources.
And applause should be kept for all those people, across the globe, that CHOOSE to ride their bike to work, take public transit, refuse to use plastic bags, continue to buy bulk (rather than fancy packaging) and opt for the admittedly rougher, but certainly far greener option of recycled personal hygiene paper products.
These are the true heros -- for without them, major automakers, such as GM, would not be in a position to realize public sentiment and corporate image is far more powerful than a small man with a big stick in an unstable oil-producing country half-way across the world.
For more information on Who Killed the Electric Car go to:
http://www.sonyclassics.com/whokilledtheelectriccar/electric.html
For more information on GM's announcement go to:
http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20061110/AUTO01/611100327/1148
For more information on criticism on Who Killed the Electric Car go to:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Who_Killed_the_Electric_Car%3F
Wednesday, November 22, 2006
Canada misses top ten in Gender Equality
Is it a surprise? Nordic Europe is the guiding light in gender equality. This is a region of the world that places quality of life and standard of life far above economic interests -- or perhaps they appreciate the fact that economic interest is always taken care of when we take care of our own.
Rather than focus on lowering taxes (the financial base with which to offer national programs and establish equalization plans) these countries focus on developing and nurturing all segments of their population. The result? Well, the obvious result, right now, is their high ranking in the World Economic Forum's Global Gender Gap Report. The longer-term, less-obvious results deal with a higher standard of living than North America, a stronger social network than most Western democracies and an economic system that is based on educating it's population not lowering taxes for businesses.
To put it bluntly: Nordic Europe tops the list for gender equality out of 115 countries in the world. That's no small feat. The countries boast the
world's best maternity leave, the best political participation rates and an education system in which women now outnumber men.
The World Economic Forum's Global Gender Gap Report 2006 named Sweden as the world's most progressive country when it comes to quality of the sexes, followed by Norway, Finland and Iceland.
Ranking the countries according to economic participation and opportunity, education, political empowerment and health and survival, Canada came in 13th and the United States ranked 29th. The small Middle East nation of Yemen came last in the global list.
Rather than focus on lowering taxes (the financial base with which to offer national programs and establish equalization plans) these countries focus on developing and nurturing all segments of their population. The result? Well, the obvious result, right now, is their high ranking in the World Economic Forum's Global Gender Gap Report. The longer-term, less-obvious results deal with a higher standard of living than North America, a stronger social network than most Western democracies and an economic system that is based on educating it's population not lowering taxes for businesses.
To put it bluntly: Nordic Europe tops the list for gender equality out of 115 countries in the world. That's no small feat. The countries boast the
world's best maternity leave, the best political participation rates and an education system in which women now outnumber men.
The World Economic Forum's Global Gender Gap Report 2006 named Sweden as the world's most progressive country when it comes to quality of the sexes, followed by Norway, Finland and Iceland.
Ranking the countries according to economic participation and opportunity, education, political empowerment and health and survival, Canada came in 13th and the United States ranked 29th. The small Middle East nation of Yemen came last in the global list.
Monday, November 20, 2006
Going green with Green Day
Punk rock is more than a fashion statement. While 'hawks, studs and pins became the visual symbol of the anti-status-quo, the rants and raves were the ideological rational for the less-than-angry music style. Enter pop-punk. This was the feel good, boppy punk that dominated the 90s. It started with Green Day and exploded with replica bands (namely: Blink 192, Sum 41, etc. etc). While these bands paid homage to punk roots, they borrowed the light and fluffy attitudes of pop to make the music more accessible to everyday kids (not just the angst-ridden trench-coat crowd).
But this is life -- and art, like life, comes full circle. Even as Green Day toured Canada on the 1998 Edgefest tour (and, yes, I was there...for each and every show) the kids from California were beginning to understand the power and prevalence of punk -- anti-authority, anti-corporate, socially relavent punk.
Now, in the 21st century the band that launched a musical style is turning back to its punk-rock roots. It started with the release of their last album, and was recently supported by their decision to promote clean and green.
In a press statement, release yesterday, Green Day announced their partnership with Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) to urge young music fans to demand clean, renewable energy solutions. The rockers hope their latest cause will help break America's "dangerous dependence on oil".
Frontman Billie Joe Armstrong stated: "This campaign is about channelling the power of millions into something positive and powerful. People are sick of our oil addiction and feel like nobody is doing anything about it. The solutions are there, the support is there, but the leadership is not."
OK -- so the whole idea of formal partnership and corporate messaging goes against the pure-punk attitude of grassroots and underground; and so the call for positive solutions is a little different than the angry demand for destruction and dismantling of society and its values -- but the sentiment (to change the status quo) is as punk as you can get. Green is the new anti-corporate and punk is the ideal medium to get kids on board.
For more information on the Green Day initiative go to:
www.GreenDayNRDC.com
But this is life -- and art, like life, comes full circle. Even as Green Day toured Canada on the 1998 Edgefest tour (and, yes, I was there...for each and every show) the kids from California were beginning to understand the power and prevalence of punk -- anti-authority, anti-corporate, socially relavent punk.
Now, in the 21st century the band that launched a musical style is turning back to its punk-rock roots. It started with the release of their last album, and was recently supported by their decision to promote clean and green.
In a press statement, release yesterday, Green Day announced their partnership with Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) to urge young music fans to demand clean, renewable energy solutions. The rockers hope their latest cause will help break America's "dangerous dependence on oil".
Frontman Billie Joe Armstrong stated: "This campaign is about channelling the power of millions into something positive and powerful. People are sick of our oil addiction and feel like nobody is doing anything about it. The solutions are there, the support is there, but the leadership is not."
OK -- so the whole idea of formal partnership and corporate messaging goes against the pure-punk attitude of grassroots and underground; and so the call for positive solutions is a little different than the angry demand for destruction and dismantling of society and its values -- but the sentiment (to change the status quo) is as punk as you can get. Green is the new anti-corporate and punk is the ideal medium to get kids on board.
For more information on the Green Day initiative go to:
www.GreenDayNRDC.com
Friday, November 17, 2006
Volunteer your time -- and your car -- for Universal Housing
Got a car? Want to help the housing movement?
The National Housing Day group is holding a car rally on Nov. 22 and asking for volunteers to show up and raise a the roof -- so to speak.
The car rally will be held on Wednesday Nov. 22 at Sunnyside Park (on Lakeshore Blvd.). It starts at 10:30am (when cars will be decorated) and the procession of cars will start at 11am.
At present there are 25 vehicles confirmed, with pledges/promises from another 25. However, the National Housing group wants to build a caravan of at least 50 cars to parade around downtown Toronto, in an effort to raise awareness on housing issues.
To endorse the event send an email to: nhd_endorsement@hotmail.com
To register call TDRC at: 416-599-8372 or email us at tdrc@tdrc.net.
Sponsors of this event include CAW, TDRC and the TO Appeal For Federal Funding for Homelessness (SCPI $). Other endorsers are welcome.
All the information you need for this event is on the TDRC website,
www.tdrc.net/carrally.htm
The National Housing Day group is holding a car rally on Nov. 22 and asking for volunteers to show up and raise a the roof -- so to speak.
The car rally will be held on Wednesday Nov. 22 at Sunnyside Park (on Lakeshore Blvd.). It starts at 10:30am (when cars will be decorated) and the procession of cars will start at 11am.
At present there are 25 vehicles confirmed, with pledges/promises from another 25. However, the National Housing group wants to build a caravan of at least 50 cars to parade around downtown Toronto, in an effort to raise awareness on housing issues.
To endorse the event send an email to: nhd_endorsement@hotmail.com
To register call TDRC at: 416-599-8372 or email us at tdrc@tdrc.net.
Sponsors of this event include CAW, TDRC and the TO Appeal For Federal Funding for Homelessness (SCPI $). Other endorsers are welcome.
All the information you need for this event is on the TDRC website,
www.tdrc.net/carrally.htm
Wednesday, November 15, 2006
A man, a memorial, a lesson in life
A few days late, but a worthwhile story to share.
This past weekend I had an opportunity to attend a life-affirming event -- an event that reminded me of the importance of passion; the fortitude of confidence; and the power of love.
It was a memorial.
At first glance, the memorial was to a man that had spent his entire life defending and supporting Canadian arts. This, in itself, deserves accolades. Canada is not often considered a passionate, drum-beating nation. We rarely cheer on our talent and seldom support our creative forces. Yet, despite this collective apathy a few champions do emerge -- Sid Adilman was definitely one of these champions. Even as the hippie-sixties were raging, Sid was busy pounding away the prose on Canadian artistic endeavours. As an entertainment reporter and columnist for numerous publications (but particularly the Toronto Star) he had the opportunity and the foresight to search out our Great White Northern identity in all artistic ventures. As such, he helped launch and define Canadian comedy, dance, music and broadcast. A feat that did not, and could not, go unnoticed.
But, despite the public acknowledgement of Sid's passion and persistence, another aspect of this quirky, delightful man emerged.
Sid was a romantic. Not just in love -- although a cross-cultural, transborder love affair with a Japanese woman he proposed to only a week after meeting, certainly proves his charm -- but also in life. He experienced joy and delight in the events and areas most Canadians take for granted. He delighted in food, in Canadian east-coast hospitality and never lost his way as a devoted, loving and supportive husband and father. This was the man we came to know during the two-hour memorial. This was the man sons Mio and Nobu had lost and wife Toshiko would mourn. This is the man whose life was dedicated to art, culture and the nurture of the creative.
Toskiko, Nobu, Mio -- my heart goes out to you for your loss. Thank you for sharing your husband and father with us. While we knew him as a prolific writer and the great defender of Canadian culture, you knew him as the man who loved to live. For this, alone, the man is worth remembering.
For more information please see:
http://www.nobu.ca/
http://thestar.blogs.com/azerb/2006/10/sid_adilman.html
http://blog.canadianjournalist.ca/blog/_archives/2006/10/15/2418635.html
http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/blogs/story.html?id=a7051994-b01f-43f1-b69f-df47c421c77c&k=36558
http://www.variety.com/article/VR1117952017.html?categoryid=25&cs=1
This past weekend I had an opportunity to attend a life-affirming event -- an event that reminded me of the importance of passion; the fortitude of confidence; and the power of love.
It was a memorial.
At first glance, the memorial was to a man that had spent his entire life defending and supporting Canadian arts. This, in itself, deserves accolades. Canada is not often considered a passionate, drum-beating nation. We rarely cheer on our talent and seldom support our creative forces. Yet, despite this collective apathy a few champions do emerge -- Sid Adilman was definitely one of these champions. Even as the hippie-sixties were raging, Sid was busy pounding away the prose on Canadian artistic endeavours. As an entertainment reporter and columnist for numerous publications (but particularly the Toronto Star) he had the opportunity and the foresight to search out our Great White Northern identity in all artistic ventures. As such, he helped launch and define Canadian comedy, dance, music and broadcast. A feat that did not, and could not, go unnoticed.
But, despite the public acknowledgement of Sid's passion and persistence, another aspect of this quirky, delightful man emerged.
Sid was a romantic. Not just in love -- although a cross-cultural, transborder love affair with a Japanese woman he proposed to only a week after meeting, certainly proves his charm -- but also in life. He experienced joy and delight in the events and areas most Canadians take for granted. He delighted in food, in Canadian east-coast hospitality and never lost his way as a devoted, loving and supportive husband and father. This was the man we came to know during the two-hour memorial. This was the man sons Mio and Nobu had lost and wife Toshiko would mourn. This is the man whose life was dedicated to art, culture and the nurture of the creative.
Toskiko, Nobu, Mio -- my heart goes out to you for your loss. Thank you for sharing your husband and father with us. While we knew him as a prolific writer and the great defender of Canadian culture, you knew him as the man who loved to live. For this, alone, the man is worth remembering.
For more information please see:
http://www.nobu.ca/
http://thestar.blogs.com/azerb/2006/10/sid_adilman.html
http://blog.canadianjournalist.ca/blog/_archives/2006/10/15/2418635.html
http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/blogs/story.html?id=a7051994-b01f-43f1-b69f-df47c421c77c&k=36558
http://www.variety.com/article/VR1117952017.html?categoryid=25&cs=1
Thursday, November 09, 2006
Shit is acceptable on national TV news
Apparently, in the United States, s%&t is news.
In an FCC ruling yesterday, the S-word was deemed acceptable as long as the the TV program even faintly resembled a news show.
The Federal Communications Commission reversed it's previous decision after reviewing and judging that a Survivor:Vanuatu contestant's use of the obscenity during an interview on a December 2004 episode of The Early Show on CBS was, in fact, acceptable. The contestant used a vulgar term for "smooth talker" to describe a fellow contestant.
Apparently the morning fluff-news show is news-worthy enough to allow a liberal tongue. Thank God...can you imagine trying to describe the city's best french toast without the use of powerful verbal descriptives!
Still, the reality is our vocabularly is inching closer and closer to devolution. For example, did you know that the simple term abandon was once represented by three descriptors: anforlætan; forlætan; ofgiefan -- all from Old English and none of them in continued use?
While the FCC ruling can be deemed an effort to reflect a more liberal attitude, it borders on linguicide. The approval on the use of vulgarities is more than a reflection of our liberal society; it is a reflection of our linguistic laziness. As a lazy culture we rely, too often, on four-letter vulgarities to describe a plethora of situations -- and this reliance on boorish words means that other, more refined descriptors are forgotten and dismissed.
As the Vocabula Review states: A society is generally as lax as its language.
While the FCC prides itself on being the moral last word for broadcast acceptability in the United States (and that, in itself, says a lot), I choose to ignore Big Brother's acceptance and condemnation of my verbally descriptive world. Instead, I will try and reform this particularly unpleasant potty-mouth of mine -- and that should take more than a few regulations and rules from a bureaucratic watch dog.
For an amusing take on vocabularly loss (and reclamation) go to:
http://vocabreclaim.blogspot.com/
For the full USA Today article on the FCC ruling go to:
http://www.usatoday.com/money/media/2006-11-07-indecency-usat_x.htm
In an FCC ruling yesterday, the S-word was deemed acceptable as long as the the TV program even faintly resembled a news show.
The Federal Communications Commission reversed it's previous decision after reviewing and judging that a Survivor:Vanuatu contestant's use of the obscenity during an interview on a December 2004 episode of The Early Show on CBS was, in fact, acceptable. The contestant used a vulgar term for "smooth talker" to describe a fellow contestant.
Apparently the morning fluff-news show is news-worthy enough to allow a liberal tongue. Thank God...can you imagine trying to describe the city's best french toast without the use of powerful verbal descriptives!
Still, the reality is our vocabularly is inching closer and closer to devolution. For example, did you know that the simple term abandon was once represented by three descriptors: anforlætan; forlætan; ofgiefan -- all from Old English and none of them in continued use?
While the FCC ruling can be deemed an effort to reflect a more liberal attitude, it borders on linguicide. The approval on the use of vulgarities is more than a reflection of our liberal society; it is a reflection of our linguistic laziness. As a lazy culture we rely, too often, on four-letter vulgarities to describe a plethora of situations -- and this reliance on boorish words means that other, more refined descriptors are forgotten and dismissed.
As the Vocabula Review states: A society is generally as lax as its language.
While the FCC prides itself on being the moral last word for broadcast acceptability in the United States (and that, in itself, says a lot), I choose to ignore Big Brother's acceptance and condemnation of my verbally descriptive world. Instead, I will try and reform this particularly unpleasant potty-mouth of mine -- and that should take more than a few regulations and rules from a bureaucratic watch dog.
For an amusing take on vocabularly loss (and reclamation) go to:
http://vocabreclaim.blogspot.com/
For the full USA Today article on the FCC ruling go to:
http://www.usatoday.com/money/media/2006-11-07-indecency-usat_x.htm
Wednesday, November 08, 2006
US elections and the advent of Death City
I was going to blog about the massive amounts of electoral porn we experienced last night.
Yes, south of the border was awash in elections, results, speeches and promises -- enough to titillate even the most jaded political junkies.
But the day is getting on and my desire to re-hash the thrills and chills of a democrate win are beginning to fade.
Instead, I wanted to offer a link to a new site based on a new horror. Most of us are too young to remember the impact of Orson Wells' War of the Worlds. At that time radio WAS the medium. Wells' -- a consummate writer -- engaged the public with a sci-fi horror that caused panic and disturbances all over North America. How thrilling!
Today, the Internet is the medium. Considered the source for news, views and research, the Internet offers us a glimpse into the real, the imagined and the in-between. Enter: the Death City.
A new, serialized writing project, Death City offers us a glimpse into the horrors and realities that could occur if a plague were to befall us.
Take a look: www.death-city.blogspot.com
Yes, south of the border was awash in elections, results, speeches and promises -- enough to titillate even the most jaded political junkies.
But the day is getting on and my desire to re-hash the thrills and chills of a democrate win are beginning to fade.
Instead, I wanted to offer a link to a new site based on a new horror. Most of us are too young to remember the impact of Orson Wells' War of the Worlds. At that time radio WAS the medium. Wells' -- a consummate writer -- engaged the public with a sci-fi horror that caused panic and disturbances all over North America. How thrilling!
Today, the Internet is the medium. Considered the source for news, views and research, the Internet offers us a glimpse into the real, the imagined and the in-between. Enter: the Death City.
A new, serialized writing project, Death City offers us a glimpse into the horrors and realities that could occur if a plague were to befall us.
Take a look: www.death-city.blogspot.com
Monday, November 06, 2006
Holy city? or Homo city? Israel stands up and out despite protests
"This is not a homo-city; this is a holy city."
So decried an orthodox cleric over the decision made by Jerusalem's attorney general to allow a gay pride parade through the streets of the revered city.
Has the irony sunk in yet?
There is no doubt that the city is steeped in historical meaning. Jews viewed the city as a holy place more than 3,000 years ago; Muslims trace their lineage back to former Jerusalem residents and consider one temple in the city as the third holiest site in the world; while, Christians continue to see this place as a the city where Jesus was crucified. Yet the common bond among all religions and people is that Jerusalem (along with Israel, as a whole) was populated and has evolved under a cloud of hate and prejudice.
The very fact that Israel exists is because the world turned its back on a group of people because of their life practices. Now, the same is happening inside the walls of one of the world's holiest cities.
Rather than honour the notion of "love thy neighbour" fights and protests have erupted all over the city to protest the planned gay pride parade.
The Jewish Telegraphic Agency reported over the weekend that: Dozens of fervently Orthodox Jews in Mea She’arim rioted at the news that the parade was to proceed, blocking off the city’s Shabbat Square with burning trash cans...The [attorney general's] approval [of the parade] caused a violent riot from hundreds of ultra-Orthodox Jews which left policemen wounded and saw the arrest of 30 people.
Just over 70 years ago the country was founded to protect ethnicity and religious convictions. Now, the very residents that have benefited from this foundation of love and tolerance are condemning people -- because they disagree with their love and companionship lifestyle.
Thank god for the rule of law.
Despite the close-minded actions of a the minority orthodox and fundamentalist religious groups in Israel, the country's attorney general, Menachem Mazuz, approved the twice-delayed parade in support of "freedom of expression". While religious leaders in the country may not condone the expression of the LGBTQ community it is clear that the country is still (thankfully) ruled by law (based on the very human rights Jews demanded almost a century ago).
While ultra-conservative views will never be changed, it is possible to equip a society and a culture with the facets of tolerance (and, hopefully, acceptance). This can only be done when equality and the freedom to express one's lifestyle choices is protected by for all under the law. While the Israeli government may be getting flak for its decision to proceed with the country's gay pride parade, I applaud their efforts to truly create an inclusive and tolerant society.
After all, that's why Israel, the nation, was first formed.
So decried an orthodox cleric over the decision made by Jerusalem's attorney general to allow a gay pride parade through the streets of the revered city.
Has the irony sunk in yet?
There is no doubt that the city is steeped in historical meaning. Jews viewed the city as a holy place more than 3,000 years ago; Muslims trace their lineage back to former Jerusalem residents and consider one temple in the city as the third holiest site in the world; while, Christians continue to see this place as a the city where Jesus was crucified. Yet the common bond among all religions and people is that Jerusalem (along with Israel, as a whole) was populated and has evolved under a cloud of hate and prejudice.
The very fact that Israel exists is because the world turned its back on a group of people because of their life practices. Now, the same is happening inside the walls of one of the world's holiest cities.
Rather than honour the notion of "love thy neighbour" fights and protests have erupted all over the city to protest the planned gay pride parade.
The Jewish Telegraphic Agency reported over the weekend that: Dozens of fervently Orthodox Jews in Mea She’arim rioted at the news that the parade was to proceed, blocking off the city’s Shabbat Square with burning trash cans...The [attorney general's] approval [of the parade] caused a violent riot from hundreds of ultra-Orthodox Jews which left policemen wounded and saw the arrest of 30 people.
Just over 70 years ago the country was founded to protect ethnicity and religious convictions. Now, the very residents that have benefited from this foundation of love and tolerance are condemning people -- because they disagree with their love and companionship lifestyle.
Thank god for the rule of law.
Despite the close-minded actions of a the minority orthodox and fundamentalist religious groups in Israel, the country's attorney general, Menachem Mazuz, approved the twice-delayed parade in support of "freedom of expression". While religious leaders in the country may not condone the expression of the LGBTQ community it is clear that the country is still (thankfully) ruled by law (based on the very human rights Jews demanded almost a century ago).
While ultra-conservative views will never be changed, it is possible to equip a society and a culture with the facets of tolerance (and, hopefully, acceptance). This can only be done when equality and the freedom to express one's lifestyle choices is protected by for all under the law. While the Israeli government may be getting flak for its decision to proceed with the country's gay pride parade, I applaud their efforts to truly create an inclusive and tolerant society.
After all, that's why Israel, the nation, was first formed.
Wednesday, November 01, 2006
Oxfam and Starbucks: Head to Head with a mug of jo'
It's multi-national non-profit VS. multi-national corporation -- each vying to control the coffee; each vying for a piece of Ethiopia's growing coffee trade.
Last week Oxfam and Starbucks went head to head (via press releases) regarding Ethiopia's bid to trademark coffee names. Oxfam accused Starbucks of urging the National Coffee Association (a trade association for the US coffee industry) to oppose the Ethiopian Intellectual Property Office (EIPO) applications to the US Patent and Trademark Office to trademark the "Sidamo," "Harar" and "Yirgacheffe" names. Starbucks countered with statistical evidence of its support for Ethiopian coffee farmers; the conglomerate noted that it favors a certification program as a better means to "protect geographically descriptive terms and ensure they represent quality products." Oxfam's response: Starbucks, stop being "disingenuous" and acknowledge your role in opposing the trademark application.
Now this is highstakes Corporate Responsibility in action. Starbucks built its brand and its image on socially responsible business practices. It was one of the first (and still one of the few) corporations to offer part-time employees health benefits; Starbucks markets its coffee based on better business practices (practices they determine and they enforce) and it pumps hundreds of thousands back into the community continent wide. Corporate responsibility is an important aspect of the Starbucks brand-image.
Enter Oxfam.
Oxfam is a confederation of 13 organizations that work together in more than 100 countries. Their mandate is to "increase worldwide public understanding that economic and social justice are crucial to sustainable development." That purpose is motivated by the fact that Oxfam wants to make equity the same priority as economic growth. From this rubrik, Oxfam has taken up the Ethiopian fight for rights and ownership. According to the non-profit, if Ethiopia secures the rights to the coffee names than the economically repressed country would capture more value from the trade -- this is because Ethiopia would have more control over the use of their names in the market, which enables farmers to receive a greater share of the retail price. Oxfam suggests that this shift (giving Ethiopia the trade name rights) would provide the Ethiopian coffee industry and its farmers an estimated $88 million (USD) extra per year.
The very public fight between Oxfam and Starbucks is reminiscent of earlier exchanges the two multi-nationals had over Fair Trade. A few years ago Oxfam and activists criticized Starbucks for insufficient support of Fair Trade. At that time, Starbucks pointed out that it was the largest purveyor of Fair Trade in the USA. At that time, Starbucks also stated that the primary factor holding it back from only using Fair Trade coffee was lack of supply. The coffee conglomerate also pointed to its numerous policies and actions in social and environmental standards to plantations that are not covered by Fair Trade standards.
The rhetoric, facts and opinions are rampant on both sides -- as this is confrontational activism. Rather than collaboration, Oxfam (and partners) have chosen to attack Starbucks. While questions still exist (such as, how will the patent ownership actually help Ethiopian farmers) they are being ignored in favour of positioning.
Corporate responsibility is important -- not only for the purposes of branding and image, but in terms of developing and fostering worldwide equity. However, corporate responsibility is still immersed in the school of confrontation -- a school that we know all too well (just look at any election, anywhere). This style of activism often ignores poignant and important questions in favour of quick and snappy sound bites. As such, facts get lost and lines are drawn and little is done to find a solution.
Regardless of your opinion on Starbucks, this mega-coffee-brand is the Wal-Mart of coffee companies in North America. As such, their buying power is an economic force in the coffee industry -- a worldwide industry that accounts for six-million tonnes of picked beans every year. If we are to create an equitable solution (that benefits farmers, companies and consumers) we will need to include Starbucks and other coffee companies in the debate. Oxfam's tactic of shaming is an old tactic and a good tactic, but in the end, it's good old fashioned discussion and compromise that will result in a responsible and equitable solution.
Until then, make mine a dark, Grande. Fair Trade, of course.
For more information on Oxfam's position on Ethiopian trademarked coffee go to:
http://www.oxfam.org/en/news/pressreleases2006/pr061026_starbucks
For more information on Starbuck's position go to:
http://www.starbucks.com/aboutus/pressdesc.asp?id=714
Last week Oxfam and Starbucks went head to head (via press releases) regarding Ethiopia's bid to trademark coffee names. Oxfam accused Starbucks of urging the National Coffee Association (a trade association for the US coffee industry) to oppose the Ethiopian Intellectual Property Office (EIPO) applications to the US Patent and Trademark Office to trademark the "Sidamo," "Harar" and "Yirgacheffe" names. Starbucks countered with statistical evidence of its support for Ethiopian coffee farmers; the conglomerate noted that it favors a certification program as a better means to "protect geographically descriptive terms and ensure they represent quality products." Oxfam's response: Starbucks, stop being "disingenuous" and acknowledge your role in opposing the trademark application.
Now this is highstakes Corporate Responsibility in action. Starbucks built its brand and its image on socially responsible business practices. It was one of the first (and still one of the few) corporations to offer part-time employees health benefits; Starbucks markets its coffee based on better business practices (practices they determine and they enforce) and it pumps hundreds of thousands back into the community continent wide. Corporate responsibility is an important aspect of the Starbucks brand-image.
Enter Oxfam.
Oxfam is a confederation of 13 organizations that work together in more than 100 countries. Their mandate is to "increase worldwide public understanding that economic and social justice are crucial to sustainable development." That purpose is motivated by the fact that Oxfam wants to make equity the same priority as economic growth. From this rubrik, Oxfam has taken up the Ethiopian fight for rights and ownership. According to the non-profit, if Ethiopia secures the rights to the coffee names than the economically repressed country would capture more value from the trade -- this is because Ethiopia would have more control over the use of their names in the market, which enables farmers to receive a greater share of the retail price. Oxfam suggests that this shift (giving Ethiopia the trade name rights) would provide the Ethiopian coffee industry and its farmers an estimated $88 million (USD) extra per year.
The very public fight between Oxfam and Starbucks is reminiscent of earlier exchanges the two multi-nationals had over Fair Trade. A few years ago Oxfam and activists criticized Starbucks for insufficient support of Fair Trade. At that time, Starbucks pointed out that it was the largest purveyor of Fair Trade in the USA. At that time, Starbucks also stated that the primary factor holding it back from only using Fair Trade coffee was lack of supply. The coffee conglomerate also pointed to its numerous policies and actions in social and environmental standards to plantations that are not covered by Fair Trade standards.
The rhetoric, facts and opinions are rampant on both sides -- as this is confrontational activism. Rather than collaboration, Oxfam (and partners) have chosen to attack Starbucks. While questions still exist (such as, how will the patent ownership actually help Ethiopian farmers) they are being ignored in favour of positioning.
Corporate responsibility is important -- not only for the purposes of branding and image, but in terms of developing and fostering worldwide equity. However, corporate responsibility is still immersed in the school of confrontation -- a school that we know all too well (just look at any election, anywhere). This style of activism often ignores poignant and important questions in favour of quick and snappy sound bites. As such, facts get lost and lines are drawn and little is done to find a solution.
Regardless of your opinion on Starbucks, this mega-coffee-brand is the Wal-Mart of coffee companies in North America. As such, their buying power is an economic force in the coffee industry -- a worldwide industry that accounts for six-million tonnes of picked beans every year. If we are to create an equitable solution (that benefits farmers, companies and consumers) we will need to include Starbucks and other coffee companies in the debate. Oxfam's tactic of shaming is an old tactic and a good tactic, but in the end, it's good old fashioned discussion and compromise that will result in a responsible and equitable solution.
Until then, make mine a dark, Grande. Fair Trade, of course.
For more information on Oxfam's position on Ethiopian trademarked coffee go to:
http://www.oxfam.org/en/news/pressreleases2006/pr061026_starbucks
For more information on Starbuck's position go to:
http://www.starbucks.com/aboutus/pressdesc.asp?id=714
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
