A mostly good article from yesterday’s Ottawa Citizen.
The best quote, I think, is that the GPO is “running more credible local candidates than the New Democrats”.
David Reevely . Easier to be Green
David Reevely, The Ottawa Citizen
Published: Tuesday, September 25, 2007
The old-left roots of Ontario’s Green party are still showing, but the party makes more sense with every election.
The Citizen’s editorialists have the privilege of seeing most of the candidates up close, as they come in for group sessions as part of our process of deciding whom we’ll endorse for election. We started inviting Greens a few elections ago, and it’s been fascinating to watch them change.
For the first time, I think they’re running more credible local candidates than the New Democrats are. Both parties have a few draftees who are just showing their parties’ flags in no-hope ridings and of newcomers who talk about their own parties as “they” and “them” instead of “we” and “us.” But none of the Green would-be MPPs I’ve met the last couple of weeks have been as ignorant of local affairs as the NDP’s Edelweiss D’Andrea, who’s running in Ottawa South and was shocked to find out that the city’s light-rail project had been cancelled.
The Greens are increasingly small-business owners and engineers, fewer and fewer of what Green leader Frank de Jong himself jokingly calls “nuts, fruits and flakes.” (He hit the Citizen’s boardroom last Friday.)
De Jong admits he started out as one of them, a music teacher drawn to the party of tree-hugging and year-round sandal-wearing. But he’s learned the hard way that people like that, however committed, don’t win elections. They’ve been joined, though, by castoffs and renegades from other parties — disaffected Tories, mostly, but Liberals and New Democrats, too, who want to make more fundamental changes in the province than those parties advocate.
De Jong speaks convincingly about how government policy encourages a polluting industrial culture. The natural resources we own in common (like clean air and fresh water and, thanks to a quirk of history, most mineral wealth) are practically free for the taking by anyone who can use them, even though they’re finite. But with our tax policies, we charge people to be productive — we tax personal income and corporate profits and impose sales taxes when somebody makes something we want to buy. De Jong describes this as privatizing public wealth and socializing private wealth, and says it drives people and companies to be wasteful with resources and stingy with labour.
As it happens, this is very nearly the same problem the industry-friendly C.D. Howe Institute complained about in a report on tax policy just last week. The institute sees it as a tax-efficiency problem, not an environmental problem, but the solution is the same: cut taxes on production, the institute says, and raise them on consumption and pollution.
The Green leader also talked to us about garbage, a distinctly unsexy subject unless you happen to live in the shadow (or the stench-plume) from the Carp Road landfill, or wonder where the city is going to find $100 million to open a new dump somewhere after the Trail Road one fills up sometime in the next 10 to 20 years.
He’s the only even semi-mainstream politician I’ve heard talk about a problem that’s well-known among environmentalists but somehow nowhere on the public agenda: all our recycling and other trash-diversion programs are half-assed, after-the-fact measures that have a difficult time dealing with products that aren’t actually designed to be recycled. Think of a drinking box, made of paper, plastic and metal — all things easily enough recycled by themselves, but glued and sealed together they make a specialty item that’s exceptionally difficult to dispose of anywhere but a landfill.
What to do about it? Here the Greens have trouble. De Jong, saying that industry retools every four years on average, figures Ontario could ban within 12 years the sale of any product not designed to be recycled or composted. This is a bit of old-style goofiness that ignores both the massive bureaucracy needed to judge the recyclability of, well, everything, and Ontario’s dependence on imports to supply us with the consumer good we’re talking about.
And it is when the Greens go off the environmental message and into non-green social and economic policy that the nuts, fruits and flakes come out to play.
They want a $10.25 minimum wage in Ontario, for instance. The argument is that nobody should work full-time and still be poor, which is appealing on the surface but ultimately makes as much sense as saying that a paperback book, any paperback book, should cost $10.25. The price of a book depends on the book and what real people are willing to pay for it, and the wage for a job depends on the labour and what real employers think it’s worth.
“Sometimes we like to out-NDP the NDP,” De Jong says, rather lamely.
The smart, sensible types might be winning the battle for the soul of the Green party, but the fight’s still on.
David Reevely is a memberof the Citizen’s editorial board.
E-mail: dreevely@thecitizen.canwest.com
A wonderful article from today’s Star…maybe the media is starting to come around?
http://www.thestar.com/comment/article/259265
Greens about more than bicycles
September 24, 2007
Carol Goar
When Frank de Jong, leader of Ontario’s Green party, was 18 years old, his father died. His mother, left with seven children on a dairy farm, couldn’t afford to send him to university.
But de Jong and his six siblings all got post-secondary degrees, thanks to bursaries from the Ontario government.
“At the time I thought: This province really cares about me. I felt a sense of belonging. So I got a good education and became a teacher.”
Thirty-three years later, de Jong wants to restore that spirit of fairness to Ontario politics.
He doesn’t think public housing or food banks or income support programs are the way to do it. In the short term, they might be necessary, de Jong says, but the real answer lies in redistributing wealth so that every citizen has an adequate income and a sense of worth.
The key to achieving this, according to the Green party leader, is to overhaul the tax system, shifting the burden from those who earn a living or build a business to those who consume non-renewable resources. “We need to share the Earth’s bounty more equitably,” de Jong says. “There is no moral or fiscal justification for poverty.”
He admits that low-income Ontarians have trouble understanding his anti-poverty plan, which would drive up their electricity and heating costs. “But I can’t talk about poverty without looking at the root causes.”
He also acknowledges that living sustainably can be hard for those struggling to make ends meet. They can’t buy solar panels, hybrid vehicles, new appliances or organic food. “But they can turn off lights, use fluorescent bulbs or walk to the store,” de Jong points out. “They can save money by saving energy.”
His prescriptions leave anti-poverty activists puzzled at best, fearful at worst.
They’re not looking for abstract schemes to restructure the economy. They want solid assurances that low-income families will have enough money to pay the rent, buy groceries and keep the lights on.
For the rest of the campaign, therefore, de Jong will focus on the immediate relief his party would offer the disadvantaged. It includes:
A $10 minimum wage.
A pledge to bring welfare rates up to the poverty line.
A crackdown on employers who exploit temporary or contract workers.
A substantial investment in early childhood education.
A reduction in tuition fees for universities and colleges.
Rebates to protect low-income consumers from rising electricity costs.
More apprenticeships for the jobless and underemployed.
On some matters, however, the Green party refuses to compromise.
De Jong would not build subsidized housing. He believes this is wrong. He would require municipalities to shift property taxes from buildings to land. This would induce developers to build more units on less land, he says, bringing down the price of apartments. “People would be able afford their own lodging if the tax structure was fixed,” he says. “There is a market solution to housing.”
Nor would he bend to public pressure to take social services off municipal property taxes. “That will just drive up home prices,” de Jong says. “We should do the exact opposite of what (Premier) Dalton McGuinty and (Mayor) David Miller are doing: Raise the carrying cost of land. Make the landowners pay more.”
These are controversial – and little understood – policy stances.
Because the Green party grew out of the environmental movement, many voters view it as a vaguely benevolent force in Ontario politics.
Because it has never elected an MPP, many citizens consider it a safe place to register their dissatisfaction with the traditional parties.
It is unfortunate that de Jong was excluded from last week’s televised debate. Electors need to know more about him and his platform.
The 51-year-old teacher may look like the candidate of bicycles and biomass. In fact, he is asking Ontarians to rethink the way they live, work and share the benefits of citizenship.
Carol Goar’s column appears Monday, Wednesday and Friday.
A nice article from the Ottawa Sun
‘My goal is to become premier’ Green party leader de Jong aims high
Andrew Thomson, The Ottawa Citizen
Published: Saturday, September 22, 2007
Frank de Jong predicted during the 1999 campaign that his party would have an MPP at Queen’s Park within the decade. Next month’s election will likely be the last chance for the leader of the Green Party of Ontario and his followers to make that prediction a reality.
They’ve set out to convince voters the party is as much about health care, the economy, and education as their traditional focus on the environment and sustainability.
And, compared to previous elections, this is their best chance. The Greens sit at six per cent support, according to a recent Ipsos Reid poll for CanWest News Service. Other polls have gauged their support in double digits. In the 2003 provincial election, the Greens won 2.8 per cent of the vote. They earned just 0.7 and 0.4 per cent of the vote in the previous two elections.
Ontario Green party leader Frank de Jong, who visited the Carp Fair on Friday, said his party is coming of age in the province, with policies on a wide-range of issues in addition to its environmental stand.
Bruno Schlumberger, the Ottawa Citizen
“As a new party, it’s taken us some time to get people on the ground in every riding; you can’t just snap your fingers,” Mr. de Jong said in an interview. “I think it’s clear now that we’re in for the long haul.
“Our objective is to win the election. My goal is to become premier.” Mr. de Jong remains confident even after being shut out of Thursday’s televised leaders’ debate by the sponsoring consortium of broadcasters. His strategy is the same as Dalton McGuinty’s, John Tory’s, or Howard Hampton’s: travel the province and make platform announcements.
Except that, in Mr. de Jong’s case, he’s been known to ride his bicycle hundreds of kilometres on the campaign trail or in search of candidates since becoming leader 15 years ago.
“There’s no magic bullet,” he explained. “(But) you need people on the ground who are credible and articulate.” The party seeks the same attention attracted by its federal counterpart since Elizabeth May became leader and the environment appeared to mushroom among voters’ concerns.
Not surprisingly, it has a detailed plan to address climate change in Ontario. The Greens would immediately implement a two per cent carbon tax on oil, natural gas, and coal imported or extracted for use in the province. They would give grants to municipalities investing in green building technology. They would promote more organic farming and water conservation. They would mimic the tough mandatory emissions standards introduced in California under Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger. They would ban logging in Algonquin Park. They would make the Ontario Building Code and property taxes more enviro-friendly.
And,as in 2003, there’s a pledge to force consumers to pay a larger share of the cost of electricity, with the intention of reducing smog, pollution, and resource waste with lower health care costs to boot.
But Mr. de Jong has been quick to move beyond the environment to broaden his party’s voter appeal.
The Greens are especially emphasizing promises to scrap the McGuinty government’s health premium and lower personal and corporate income taxes by shifting the financial burden onto resource users.
They would also raise the minimum wage to $10.25 an hour, lower the voting age to 16, and invest $400 million to promote local agriculture consumption.
And while the Progressive Conservatives pledge to fund faith-based schools, the Greens want to nix any public money for religious education — including Roman Catholic boards. Fifty-three per cent of voters support the concept of a single public system, according to a recent Ipsos Reid poll.
“That’s been our policy all along,” Mr. de Jong said. “We didn’t create the issue.” The Greens are also pledging to abolish standardized testing and the Ontario College of Teachers.
“We’re a much more sophisticated party,” he said. “We have more numbers in our platform, more concrete targets,” Mr. de Jong said after releasing the Green manifesto — 33 pages of promises ranging from six new statutory holidays (Earth Day included) to more money for Northern Ontario.
Mr. de Jong, 51, grew up on a dairy farm near Guelph with six siblings, the child of immigrant Dutch farmers, before obtaining a music degree at the University of Western Ontario.
The public school teacher ran in several federal and provincial elections while living in Ottawa during the early 1990s. Mr. de Jong also helped form a loose affiliation of Greens across Ottawa-Carleton, and ran for municipal office in 1991. He ran in Capital Ward, losing to Jim Watson, future mayor and now the minister of health promotion in Dalton McGuinty’s cabinet.
Mr. de Jong broke the 10 per cent (of the vote) barrier in a 2005 byelection won by new Conservative leader John Tory in the Dufferin-Peel-Wellington-Grey. That number slipped to 6.2 per cent the following year in the race to replace Liberal Gerard Kennedy in Parkdale-High Park.
This year he is running in Toronto’s Davenport riding, hoping to unseat Liberal MPP Tony Ruprecht.
The Green party’s chances on Oct. 10 might be enhanced by the concurrent referendum on adopting a mixed-member proportional system for the Ontario legislature, something Mr. de Jong has long advocated.
“I think the arguments are solid that it’s a better system,” he said. “It gets rid of strategic voting, throwaway votes, artificial majorities.”
© The Ottawa Citizen 2007
Likeable Leaders – but where’s Frank?
http://www.thestar.com/article/258364
Voices: Likeable leader
September 19, 2007
We asked you which provincial leader do you think is the most likeable: Dalton McGuinty, Howard Hampton or John Tory. Here’s what you had to say.
I don’t find any of them likeable. Most politicians are pathologically lying grand-standers with delusions of statesmanhood. However, I’m not voting for who I like – liking a politician is not/should not be a requirement to agreeing with a party’s platform.
Matt Keefer, Peterborough, Ont.
Dalton McGuinty and likeable in the same sentence make an oxymoron. The man is unbalanced and unpleasantly smug. Both Tory and Hampton are likeable and decent men.
John Chuckman, Toronto
I’d definitely go with Howard Hampton, because the other two parties consistently screw things up anyway. The NDP cares about the environment and the people and advocate way more than the other two parties.
Janice Ashby, Toronto
John Tory is by far the most likeable leader. He stands for his principles and does not have the history of broken promises and doublespeak that are the legacy of the current premier. Howard Hampton is a close second. Although I do not agree with his policies, he is a very respectable and honest man.
Jerrold Landau, Toronto
I’m offended you have not included Frank de Jong. I like Frank de Jong and what the Greens stand for.
Jacquie Fraser, Etobicoke
I am absolutely appalled that the survey did not include the leader of the green party. I cannot believe that at a critical time such as now with continuous scientific evidence about global warming that the one party that stands up for the little guy that has no voice (animals, trees, planet earth), you have somehow seemed to have forgotten to include his name.
Ali Nazifi, Toronto
While many may feel that John Tory is an aloof man of privilege, I have met him and found him to be anything but. He is friendly, personable and most importantly, believable. Howard Hampton is probably the last man I’d vote for, but I give high marks for his honesty, passion and determination – he is what he appears to be. As for Dalton McGuinty – from the first moment I ever heard him speak, I found him evasive and hard to believe.
Jon Fraser, Toronto
I happen to like Frank DeJong of the Green Party best. From what little I’ve seen and heard from him, he seems to walk his talk, and isn’t full of it. Why is his name not on the list?
Linda Sepp, Toronto
Wrong question. Asking who the most likeable leader is reduces our democracy to a popularity contest between personality cults. We should be asking each other what kind of Ontario we want and which team of politicians (if any) can best actualize our collective vision.
Simon A. Dougherty, Scarborough
I was disappointed by your question as it does not give us the choice of the leaders of, say, the Green party or a better choice of ‘none.’ To be honest, McGuinty and Tory gave themselves a pay raise last holiday season while Hampton has no concept of economics in light of his party stance on raising the minimum wage, just to name a fault of each of them.
Jason Bayda, Vaughan
I don’t find any of them likeable. I’m having a hard time deciding which one will get my vote.
Carolyn Hood, Toronto
Actually I prefer Frank DeJong on the likeable leader scale. Therefore, I decline to participate in your “likeable” poll.
John Dewar, Keswick, Ont.
I think an old adage applies here, better the devil you know. Let’s face it, Howard Hampton is a nice guy but his party hasn’t learned form the Rae regime and they will never govern this province. Mr. Tory continues to associate with the dregs of the Harris government of renown (those who weren’t drafted to work for Harper) and he has nothing positive to say about anything. All-in-all, McGuinty’s term has not been that bad. There was a lot to fix and I think we should stay the course.
Will Reid, Scarborough
Dalton McGuinty seems like the most normal of the bunch. Howard Hampton is always yelling and carping and not suggesting anything. John Tory seems aloof and self-aggrandizing and pompous. McGuinty strikes me as the kind of guy who would mow your lawn when he’s out doing his own.
Angus Steele, Toronto
I don’t find any of them likeable; what’s that got to do with whether one of them will make an able and effective leader?
Chris Cosby, Scarborough
It’s sad that likeability is evidently being considered as a factor in whether or not someone can run a province. I’d rather someone who can make the tough — and necessary — decisions, than someone who can smile brightly and provide a glib sound bite for the camera. Voters should look past this sort of thing and vote on platform, policy, reliability, and perhaps character. But likeability? No.
Carla Antonelli, Toronto
Dalton McGuinty – he is an honest man. While there are claims of broken promises, Dalton strives to make Ontario a very competitive province in the global economy. Especially in education for our young people.
Krishna Singh, Scarborough
Howard Hampton is the most likeable leader in the current election. He speaks out for working families who have to spend a lot of their hard-earned minimum wages in order for their children to attend our “free” education system. All Canadian children should be able to attend school without their parents having to find money for school supplies. They should have easier access to post-secondary education too. They are our future.
Howard Raper, Brechin, Ont.
Howard Hampton is the most likeable because he is standing up for working families.
Emily Shelton, Toronto
Personally I find none of the leaders to be the most likeable. Lack of personality coupled with a distinct lack of credibility makes for a less than exciting choice. And why not include the leader of the Green Party as one of your choices?
Rob Jewitt, Cobourg
Politicians can simply groom themselves to appear “likeable” to further their own personal agenda. To rate politicians on their likeability merely measures their potential to pull the wool over the eyes of the public. Recent history as shown that likeability is not necessarily indicative of the best candidate. Were we really using our common sense when we elected Mike Harris?
David Boyle, Toronto
Dalton McGuinty is the most likeable; he truly comes across as an average professional you might meet at a little league game or in line at the movies. That said, he still looks uncomfortable in his own skin, and doesn’t project a strong innate sense that he’s a leader.
Dennis Jordan, Milton, Ont.
I would answer Frank de Jong, but he’s not on the list. Why is the media consistently omitting the Green Party leaders from debates and polls?
Jason Paquette, Toronto
I’m not sure what The Star’s criteria is for “likeable”, but if I were picking the party with the best policies and grasp of Ontario’s problems, I would hands down choose Howard Hampton. John Tory’s idea of funding private religious schools is preposterous. Dalton’s hypercritical stance on supporting the Catholic board is unethical.
Tor Sandberg, Toronto
Howard Hampton is most likeable because he’s a real person. John Tory is too smooth by half, and Dalton McGuinty comes across as a robot.
Gary Carper, Toronto
Are those three my only options? Then I will politely pass.
Alexa van Hoof, Scarborough
Would it really be that hard for you to include Frank de Jong in the poll? For shame Toronto Star.
Paul Richardson, North York
Why isn’t Frank de Jong of the Green Party included on this list? Again, we see media bias in political reporting, even in the guise of a poll.
Mary-Margaret Jones, Toronto
Why does The Star insist on not including Frank de Jong as a leader when the Greens are only a hair behind the NDP in the polls? If Frank got coverage that could also change.
Cameron Topp, Hamilton
Great article frrom the Star on the GPO
http://www.thestar.com/article/258091
The televised leaders’ debate – the pivotal point in any election – takes place tomorrow night, but Frank de Jong won’t be there.
De Jong is the leader of the provincial Greens, who are nudging double digits in the polls. While organizationally challenged and underfinanced, the Greens have moved from being a joke party to “a player on the political landscape,” in de Jong’s own words.
But de Jong did not get an invitation from the networks to participate in the leaders’ debate because, among other things, his party does not have a seat in the Legislature.
That’s a pity, because de Jong and the Greens actually have some interesting things to say.
The Green platform was released last week, and the media focus was on the relatively trivial promise to add six new statutory holidays to the calendar. But the platform includes many more substantive planks, including:
A major “tax shift” away from income (personal or corporate) and toward consumption, including a carbon tax. The health tax would be repealed and a carbon tax of 2 per cent would be levied on oil, natural gas and coal.
An overhaul of property assessment to tax buildings at a lower rate than the land on which they sit.
A sharp hike in electricity rates to reflect the “true, unsubsidized cost” of generation.
Abolition of funding for all faith-based schools, including Catholic.
Restoration of school boards’ power to levy taxes, up to 5 per cent of their budgets.
Abolition of standardized testing and the College of Teachers (the disciplinary body for the profession).
A lowering of the voting age from 18 to 16.
A ceiling on “excessive overtime” to spread the workload.
This is a decidedly eclectic mix of policies. Some planks could be called left-wing, while others are far-right, including the tax shift, which is an idea espoused by the libertarian Cato Institute in the United States. And some are just plain self-serving, including the education planks, which seem tailored to de Jong’s day job as a public school teacher.
The major environmental groups have given the Greens the cold shoulder because they see their platform as eschewing government regulations for more “market-oriented” policies – an accusation that de Jong does not deny.
“We endorse the invisible green hand,” he says. “We know regulations won’t work. The market always trumps regulations one way or the other.”
But it is the “mainstream” parties that are most incensed by the Greens’ rise in the polls – which is arguably coming at the expense of all three of them. They think that voters are moving toward the Greens because they are attracted by the label without really knowing what’s in the party platform.
De Jong rejects the implication that Green voters are ignorant of what his party stands for. “We say it as loud and clear as we possibly can,” he says.
I’ll close with an anecdote that validates de Jong’s view: In a recent election, an NDP candidate I know made a point of knocking on all the doors in the riding with Green signs and telling the residents what was in the platform of the party they were supporting. The answer was invariably: “Yes, we know, and we like it.”
In other words, the Greens, with their unique combination of environmentalism and libertarianism, may have tapped into a vein of the voting population that is being served by no other party.
Ian Urquhart’s provincial affairs column appears Monday, Wednesday and Friday. Email: iurquha@thestar.ca
Is it just me or is the press being a bit nicer to us this time around…
…well except for the Leaders’ debate, of course
http://www.thestar.com/OntarioElection/article/257103
Greens in a good spot after first week of race
Sep 16, 2007 04:30 AM
Thomas Walkom
With just one week of the formal Ontario election campaign out of the way, most sensible people aren’t yet paying attention to the claims of rival political parties. But if I had to pick a winner for the week, it would be Frank de Jong’s Greens.
This is not because the Greens will sweep the province on Oct.10. They will not. They may not see a single candidate elected. But media and public are beginning to take them more seriously. For a party on the margin, this is great step forward.
True, de Jong has been barred again from the televised leaders debate. That privilege is still reserved for the big three – Liberal Premier Dalton McGuinty, Conservative chieftain John Tory and New Democratic Party Leader Howard Hampton.
But not all are taking their cues from the networks. Last week, CBC Radio’s Metro Morning interviewed what it called the four main party leaders – Hampton, McGuinty, Tory and de Jong.
Meanwhile, major newspapers are according the Greens real coverage, something that big media does not do for other minor parties like the Communists or Family Coalition.
On Thursday, for example, Hampton and Tory both released important parts of their platforms. The Conservative leader spoke of spending $1.3 billion to clean up emissions from the Nanticoke coal plant on Lake Erie. The NDP reiterated its promise to boost the minimum wage immediately to $10 an hour. Yet neither story merited a mention on the Star’s front page. By contrast, de Jong’s promise to legislate six new statutory holidays did.
The Star is not alone. Factiva, the Dow Jones media database that includes all stories published in major and mid-size Ontario newspapers, recorded 58 hits for de Jong and the Greens last week. During the first week of the 2003 Ontario election, the equivalent number was eight.
By comparison, the NDP’s Hampton scored 154 Factiva hits this past week, compared to 229 during week one of the 2003 campaign.
All of this may be ephemeral. The Greens were running at about 6 per cent in public opinion polls before the 2003 election. But when the day of decision came, they garnered a mere 2.8 per cent of the actual vote.
Still, de Jong does possess an advantage that he did not have four years ago. This time, the province isn’t gripped – at least not yet – by a throw-out-the-bums mood. Faced with a choice between a Liberal leader who seems conservative and a Conservative leader who seems liberal, it is more laid-back.
Normally, the NDP would benefit from this what-me-worry attitude. Ontarians tend to swing to third parties when they think the stakes are not too high.
But many voters still remember the Bob Rae NDP government of the early `90s with distaste (that became evident last year when Rae failed in his bid to win the federal Liberal leadership). For such voters, the danger of supporting the New Democrats is that they might win.
The Greens, on the other hand, appear to present a no-risk option, particularly for those who aren’t too concerned by de Jong’s market-oriented and somewhat draconian platform (he wants to boost electricity rates dramatically in order to conserve energy).
While new, the Greens are now familiar enough to be respectable. And since they are so unlikely to win power, they appear to offer voters a costless way to thumb their noses at the political establishment.
Which, for a fourth party, is not a bad place to be.
This is a letter I just sent to the Toronto Star….not sure if it will get published…probably not, but I had to try…
In the last few days I have read a number of letters from people concerned about both the Liberal and Conservative positions on school funding. Fawad Siddiqui writes, “…no funding of any religious schools. Our society is secular and, as such, no faith should be preferred over others….Catholic schools should not be funded…” Malcolm Buchanan states, “…why should we fund Roman Catholic schools? Why don’t they (the party leaders) respond to the public cry to end the special privilege to the separate school system? Politicians in Newfoundland moved to end religious domination of public education…if only one of the three main party leaders would do the same in Ontario.” William J. Phillips writes, “A province cannot offer superior educational opportunities in its schools if it fragments its system by funding religious schools.” Sheila Austin states, “Newfoundland has shown that separation (of religion and the state in schools) has reduced animosity between people of various religions. I suggest we need a referendum on this issue.” And Margaret Middleton writes, “It takes pure guts to initiate a single public school system.”
All of these people will be very happy to know that the Green Party position on this issue is exactly what they are asking for; namely ending funding for Catholic schools, and focusing all of our public resources on a single public school system, so that we can offer every child a high quality education in a safe and supportive environment. And to ensure that we are following the will of the people, we would call for a referendum to be held so that every person would have their voice heard on this critical issue.
Of course, with the media once again failing to give the Green Party the converge that we deserve, and with our leader, Frank de Jong excluded from the televised leaders’ debate, many people will not even realize that there is a party whose position on school funding, as well as many other issues, is supported by a majority on Ontarians.
At a time when the Green Party’s support is within the standard of error of the NDP’s, when the environment consistently tops the list of issues important to voters, when the Green Party is running candidates in every one of the 107 ridings in Ontario, and when over 70% of people believe that the Green Party should be included in the debates, it is truly a shame that democracy continues to be stifled in this way.
Russell Korus
Green Party of Ontario Candidate,
Vaughan.
Sorry about the lack of posts
I just wrote an exam in one of the most boring courses I have ever had the misfortune of studying, Carriage of Goods by Sea, so I am now an expert in charterpartys, bills of lading, and marine insurance.
Needless to say, I have rarely had my nose out of the textbook for the last couple of weeks, and I still have one exam to go on Friday. At least this one is in advanced criminal evidence so it is not nearly as mind-numbingly boring.
Anyhow, come this weekend, I will be able to devote all of my time to the campaign, and I promise the blog posts will start flowing.
In the meantime, here is the results of an interview I had with Phil Alves at Vaughan Today:
Vaughan’s Green candidate
Philip Alves
Vaughan Today
Russell Korus says the birth of his first son six years ago got him thinking about the future and changed him from thumb-twirling political apathy into a Green thumb.
Last week, the 36-year-old father of two was confirmed as the Green Party candidate for the riding of Vaughan in the Oct. 10 provincial election.
“When you become a parent, you start thinking about things that you never thought about before,” he said this week in a phone interview. “The underlying thought in my head was always, ‘When my son is my age, in 30 years’ time, what’s his quality of life going to be like?’”
Despite what Korus characterizes as a lot of unhappiness with both the Liberal government of Dalton McGuinty and the alternative posed by John Tory’s Progressive Conservatives, he said he is concerned that fear itself will again dictate the outcome.
“It’s so often the case that people are voting Liberal because they want to make sure the Conservatives don’t get in,” he said. “And people are voting Conservative to make sure the Liberals don’t get in.
“Nobody ever votes for what they want.”
As Korus sees it, negative voting is a fundamental problem with Ontario’s democratic system, making this a critical election because of the referendum question that will be on the ballot.
Along with choosing a candidate, voters will determine the future of Ontario’s electoral system, by either opting to keep the current first-past-the-post system or having it changed to mixed member proportional representation.
“I think it’s a massively important election,” he said. “This proposed MMP system will really right a lot of those wrongs and allow people to vote their conscience, and not feel that they’re throwing their vote away.”
Korus sums up his campaign’s goal in a short, though tongue-twisting slogan: 10-10-20.
“Ten-10-220,” he said, before catching and laughing at his mistake.
“Sorry. That’s 10-10-twenty — I have to remember not to add that extra two in there — 10-10-20, so on Oct. 10 we get 20 percent (and) I think I can finish second.
“That’s the goal that we’ve set for the campaign, which is somewhat ambitious, but at the same time I think it’s definitely possible.”
True to his Green credentials, Korus counts the environment among the top concerns facing the province in this election, though he doesn’t see it as isolated. Instead, he considers the environment and health care two sides of the same coin.
“I think people are really starting to make the connection between those two, and I think that’s what’s really most significant,” he said. “If we focused at least a little bit more on the preventative side, then 10 or 15 years down the road, well, guess what?
“All of a sudden you don’t need nearly as much money in the healthcare system because there’s not as many people getting sick.”
Related are transportation issues that impact the environment and, therefore, health, he said.
Though this is his third race as a Green candidate in the last three years — he ran twice federally — he refuses to call himself a politician.
“I won’t call myself a politician because if you look at the definition of ‘politician’ in the dictionary, it’s usually not very flattering,” he said. “I prefer ‘public servant’.
“If political ambition was my primary motivation, I’d try and get the Liberal or Conservative nomination and actually have a chance to win rather than running on my convictions and on my beliefs.”
Though he calls Vaughan home, Korus actually lives outside the riding he hopes to represent.
“I’m about 200 feet from the boundary — I’m one street away,” he said. “It’s close, but the drawback is I won’t be able to vote for myself and my wife won’t be able to vote for me.”
