No wonder so many people I hear from every day tell me that they have had it with politicians.

Take Canada’s prime minister Stephen Harper for example.

Prime Mnister Stephen Harper outlines his 'grand plan' for Canadians at World Economic Forum in Switzerland.

This past January 26, Harper used an opportunity thousands of miles away from us, at the World Economic Forum  in Switzerland, to drop a bombshell that could have a profound impact on the Old Age Security funding as millions of Canadians are approaching retirement age.

“Harper’s Grand Plan” read the headline in the following morning’s Globe and Male above a story that quoted saying that Canada’s demographics (meaning the big bulging numbers of baby boomers now approaching their 65^th birthday) pose “a threat to the social programs and services that Canadians cherish.”  What if some of us were to argue that one of the biggest threats to the social programs and services  Canadians cherish is Harper’s government?

This is a government that has given billions of dollars in tax cuts to corporations that have turned around and moved their operations, along with tens-of-thousands of jobs, overseas. And this is a government that says it now plans billions of dollars more in corporate tax cuts. Yet now Harper is telling Canadians who have been paying federal taxes  all of their working lives that they may how have to wait until they are 67 year old (instead of 65 or younger) before they are eligible for a penny of that money for their retirement?

 Yes,  Harper decides to drop this bombshell on us  RIGHT NOW – not before last spring’s federal election when Canadians could have had their say on such a fundamentally vital bread-and-butter issue in the voting booth. And anyone out there who is old enough to vote who is naïve enough to believe that Harper and company didn’t know they were going to do something about retirement benefits before last spring’s election must also be looking forward to the Easter bunny bringing them a basket of eggs this spring.

 Let’s face it folks, if Harper had been honest with the Canadian people and told us before the last election that he was going to he was planning to change the rules when it comes to who and at what time in their lives people would be eligible to receive Old Age Security. Had Harper brought this up then, he may not have won a majority government because it is people in or near retirement who make up the largest percentage of voters.

This is not to say that something doesn’t need to be done about retirement benefits given the disproportionally large number of people approaching retirement compared to the number of people that will be left in the workforce. This is a matter that has been discussed in government and economic circles, and in the media, for many years which is why Harper knew before the last election that his government was going to have to do something but didn’t have enough courage or respect for the Canadian people to say so.

Let’s assume the figures are correct and that the cost of providing OAC will jump from $36.5 billion in 2010 to more than $100 billion by 2030. Is it fair to make everyone wait until they are 67 to be able to collect any of the funds? What about the person who has a low-income job or someone who does heavy manual labour and can’t go on working until they are 67. The Globe and Mail outlined the concerns this January 28 of a 61-year-old woman who has suffered some injuries working in a factory and feels she has to retire at age 65. “You start working at 18 years old,” she was quoted saying, and “you’ve worked this far only to see the goalposts moved away.”

If the age for collecting OAS is raised to 67, how many aging baby boomers are going to decide to go on working rather than retiring at age 60 or 65, and what is that going to mean for young people trying to find a job? Younger people have already been having a hard enough time finding work since the mandatory retirement age was repealed and the economy fell through the floor.  

Why not consider further clawbacks in OAS benefits to people who have the personal means to support their retirement and, dare I say, why not consider making people pay a few extra dollars in taxes each week to support benefits for retirees who need them?

We should be having a discussion as a nation on how we should meet the challenge of assisting growing numbers of retirees, but I am sure we won’t. Harper had a well-known reputation of being a dictator with his own Conservative caucus while he was leading a minority government and now that he has a majority, he can dictate his will on the rest of us with no fear of being defeated by the opposition.

Unfortunately, Harper has more than three years left to lay his ‘grand plans’ on us before the next federal election.

Niagara At Large wants to know what you think about this issue in the comment boxes below. Remember that we only post comments by people who share their first and last names.

 A Brief Commentary by Doug Draper

 Now Kevin Smith is talking!

NHS supervisor Kevin Smith

Smith was also quoted saying a new hospital in Niagara, Ontario’s southern tier would probably also mean “the closure of the majority of the other sites” in the south end.

Resident in south Niagara have felt increasingly alienated from the NHS (the body created by the province a dozen years ago to amalgamate most of Niagara’s hospital services) since that health system forged ahead more than three years ago with plans to build a super hospital, including a cancer and cardiac treatment centre, in the west end of St. Catharines rather than in a more central site in the region.

For many thousand south of Niagara residents, the NHS had already written them off as “second-class citizens” (as more than a few put it) when it’s now-defunct board and CEO Debbie Sevenpifer tabled a so-called “hospital improvement plan” in 2008. That plan that set the stage for downgrading the emergency rooms in hospitals in Fort Erie and Port Colborne to urgent care centres and ultimately lays plans for consolidating many other acute care services in the west St. Catharines hospital to be opened about a year from now.

Since then, a number of voices in the region, including this publishing NAL and writing a weekly column for Niagara This Week and its Fort Erie Post and Port Colborne Leader editions) have argued that the only real solution for south Niagara residents is a health system and new hospital of their own. Port Colborne Mayor Vance Badawey and his council have already gone so far over the past three years of working toward a system of primary and acute care services for the southern tier.

So it is good to learn that Kevin Smith, who reports to the province’s Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care and will soon be unveiling his recommendations on what should be done to improve hospital services here, is apparently seriously looking at the options of a new hospital and separate health system body for south Niagara. It also sounds promising to learn that Smith feels the cost of a new hospital is reasonable given how much it would likely cost to continue maintaining and upgrading older hospitals in the south end.

Niagara At Large invites readers to share their ideas and views on this news in the comment boxes below. We want to know what you and your neighbours in communities across the southern tier think. Please remember that we only post comments by people who share their real first and last names with them.

Although most residents continue to demand better health facilities, the town of Fort Erie seems determined to welcome into the community a polluting giant, the toxic effects of which could affect the health of residents on both sides of the Niagara River for decades. I refer of course to the proposed motor speedway.

Architect's rendition of proposed NASCAR race track for Fort Erie, Ontario

While proponents trumpet their support of auto racing, the public at large continues in blissful ignorance of the very real threat that this endeavour poses to Fort Erie and the whole Niagara area. In a word: LEAD.

Have locals forgotten the pollution of Love Canal?

The problems with mercury in the irreplaceable fish stocks? The illnesses and deaths caused by asbestos? Apparently so, because now they are prepared to accept the pollution of our neighbourhoods by lead, one of the most toxic substances known to man. Because of its extreme danger to health, the Canadian and U.S. governments spent billions of dollars to enforce regulations to remove lead from gasoline. What is little known, however, is that both governments granted an exemption from these regulations to motor sports. While this exemption was originally due to expire in 2008, it was extended in Canada to January 2010 and then further extended indefinitely.

As the website envirolaw.com noted in November 2011: “… leaded gas is still being used in racing cars and trucks in Canada, with no end in sight. People who live near races are usually distressed about the impact of the noise on their health; do they even know about the lead threat?” This information can easily be confirmed by visiting the Environment Canada website and looking at the current regulations as modified on 2011-11-17. The stated purpose of the leaded gas exemption was to preserve economic activity at existing race tracks. It was not intended to encourage new lead emissions!

The new speedway is expected to operate year-round, depositing toxic lead into the adjacent wetlands. Once there it can poison the flora and fauna, drain into the Niagara River and be carried to Niagara Falls, Niagara-On-The-Lake and all the other communities on both sides of the river.

The deadly effects of lead in the environment have been well documented. Because lead is a chemical element, it never degrades. It is a powerful neurotoxin that can produce behavioral irregularities or permanent mental retardation. While everyone is at risk, lead poses the greatest danger to children, pregnant women and nursing mothers. All pro-lead arguments pale in comparison to the need to protect children’s mental development. Is any sport worth the possible infliction of physical and mental disease on our unaware and trusting children?

None of this appears to interest the inhabitants of Fort Erie. There is no excuse for this deliberate blindness. Lead’s long-term effects have been exhaustively researched and documented which is why governments have acted to ban it. Now Fort Erie welcomes it. This makes no sense at all. The public’s health should be the first consideration of our elected officials.

Wake up Niagara! Are you willing to sacrifice the health of your children and of future generations so that comparatively few people can watch vehicles ride round and round a track? Think about it carefully. Think very carefully.

Bill Trench is a Fort Erie, Ontario resident and a member of the Niagara area citizens group, the Niagara Heritage Alliance.

 (We welcome you to share your views on this post. Please remember that we only post comments by people willing to share their real first and last names.)

 A Brief Foreword by Doug Draper

Niagara At Large is posting the following January 27 media release from the Toronto-based Ontario Health Coalition, a citizens’ organization that has often visited Niagara, Ontario to support residents fighting for better hospital services in this region.

Ontario Health Coalition director Natalie Mehra

The OHC’s director Natalie Mehra, along with a representative of the citizens group Democracy Watch and Bryan Evans, a politics professor at Ryerson University, warned at a media conference at Queen’s Park this January 27 that the Drummond Commission, created by the province’s Liberal government, is about to recommend “sweeping public service cuts” to the government with no input from the public.

 “Despite no mention of these plans during the election only a few months ago, the McGuinty government has forged a mandate for the Drummond Commission that is extraordinarily biased towards privatization,” Mehra  told Queen’s Park reporters.

“The Ontario Liberals’ budgeting and policy-making process in the past few months violates every democratic, open, good government principle,” added Duff Conacher of f Democracy Watch. “The public paid for the Drummond Report, yet the government has shut down the legislature without forming legislative committees, without any open hearings and without public input into the major policy changes ahead.”

The Drummond Commission recommendations are expected to be tabled soon, so watch for the fireworks. Niagara At Large will make every effort  to keep readers posted on the possible impacts of these recommentations on public services in the greater Niagara Region.

 Here is the Ontario Health Coalition media release -

  Public Interest Groups Deeply Concerned About Undemocratic Process, Drummond Commission & Public Service Cuts

 Toronto, January 27 – The McGuinty government is planning sweeping public service cuts and restructuring without public input and proper democratic processes, public interest groups revealed in a press conference this morning at Queen’s Park. The groups are concerned about the Drummond Commission, which was created by the McGuinty government to make recommendations to cut public services and budgets.

Don Drummond, a well-heeled member of the Toronto elite, has strong links to private health care interests and lobby groups. He has adopted a highly political role, conducting rounds of media interviews to sell his proposals even before the Ontario Legislature has had an opportunity to receive his report. At the same time, Premier Dalton McGuinty and Health Minister Deb Matthews are launching major policy changes through speeches to exclusive executive and corporate audiences.

The McGuinty government, which has been elected with a minority, failed to forge an agreement with opposition parties to set up the Standing Committees of the Legislature during the Fall Session.  As such, there is no Standing Committee on Finance and Economic Affairs and no Pre-Budget Hearings.  In a minority government, the ruling party does not hold a majority on the standing committees. These committees have real powers to amend legislation and hold public hearings.

 The coalition and public interest groups argue that the process is manipulative and inappropriate. 

 “Drummond is an extremely wealthy retired bank executive and does not in any way represent the values and needs of regular Ontarians. He selected a very narrow elite of hospital executives and pro-privatization lobbyists to consult while he was writing his report.  When we and a few other groups met with him in early December – at our request – the report was already written,” noted Natalie Mehra, coalition director. “Despite no mention of these plans during the election only a few months ago, the McGuinty government has forged a mandate for the Drummond Commission that is extraordinarily biased towards privatization.  It has virtually no public interest principles to protect the fairness and equity of Ontarians’ public services.”

 “The Ontario Liberals’ budgeting and policy-making process in the past few months violates every democratic, open, good government principle,” added Duff Conacher, Board Member and Founding Director of Democracy Watch. “The public paid for the Drummond Report, yet the government has shut down the legislature without forming legislative committees, without any open hearings and without public input into the major policy changes ahead.  As a minority government, the Liberals must compromise and be more open and democratic.”

 “The Drummond Commission will be recommending a fundamental restructuring of how Ontario’s public services are produced and delivered. It would be unprecedented, given the magnitude of change envisioned, if a broad public consultation did not take place,” concluded Dr. Bryan Evans, professor of politics at Ryerson University.

 (We welcome you to share your views on this post. Please remember that we only post comments by people willing to share their real first and last names.)

A recent cartoon published in The St. Catharines Standard – a newspaper which is now part of the Conservative Party leaning Sun Media empire – portrayed soldiers standing on guard during the War of 1812. They were instructed by their commander to stand firm, since if the Americans succeeded in winning, Canada would be turned into a National Park.

American troops stand firm during War of 1812 battle.

Following his encounter with the Native Americans of the plains, Catlin wrote the words which still resonate with Canadians who, in these dark times that try the soul, still dare to identify themselves as environmentalists.  He urged that “some great protecting policy of government” serve to preserve its “pristine beauty and wildness (as) a magnificent park.”  Such a “A Nation’s Park”, for Catlin would allow the world to see “for ages to come, the native Indians in classic attire, galloping his wild horse, with sinewy bow, and shield and lance, amid the fleeting herds of elk and buffaloes.”

Following Catlin’s 1832 vision, many years went by before diluted variants of his vision gained significant popular support. It was not until June 30, 1864 that American President Abraham Lincoln signed the law that protected the Yosemite Valley as a park. Here however, park protection was quite poor as the park was administered initially by the State of California.

 The evolution of anything recognizable as a U.S. National Park system was a slow struggle.  It was not until 1890 that effective protection was obtained from the domestic livestock whose grazing threatened to kill young trees in Yosemite, through legislation championed by pioneer American environmentalist John Muir.  The federal law had the U.S. Army patrol the park as had previously been done in Yellowstone National Park, created in 1871.

 What makes Sun Media’s sacrifice of historical truth to the gods of corporate profits so offensive is that much of the opposition to the American expansion in the War of 1812 came from efforts by native people to achieve a beautiful goal that approximated Catlin’s dream.  While these natives did not use the term national park, what they were calling for sought the same purpose.  This was continued control over widespread areas of land for the continuation of their way of life based on extensive herds of elk and buffalo.

British troops torch Washington during War of 1812

 While he did not use the term “national park”, the architect of native resistance to American invasion in the War of 1812 had a term of similar power for its time. This was the concept of “Indiana”, an Indian buffer state between the United States and Upper Canada.  Indiana was the vision of the great native chief Tecumseh.  He was acutely aware of the consequences of American expansionism on the environment, noting that it promoted deforestation and subsequent soil erosion which polluted water. Tecumseh sought the establishment of Indiana under native governance which would remove American expansionists from native lands in the states of Michigan, Illinois and Ohio.

 By provoking the Americans to declare war on Great Britain in 1812, Tecumseh won what appeared to be a partial victory. Through war he sought to bring down the weight of a great power upon the United States to achieve the realization of Indiana.  Although Tecumseh died in battle in 1813, the defeat of Napoleon in 1814 gave some hope to his cause. For the last six months of the war the issue of Indiana was the only point at which American and British diplomats could not agree upon. This resulted in some of the fiercest battles of the war, including the burning of Washington. D.C. by British troops.

 Rather than showing Canadian red coats fighting against the threat of a National Park, a more accurate image would have been to illustrate how the fear of Indiana motivated American forces. This is what would have prompted the call for American troops to hold the line following the burning of Washington and during the British attack on Baltimore. The danger was well understood by Francis Scott Key. Following the celebration of the American victory in Baltimore, he composed America’s national anthem, “The Star Spangled Banner,” and went on to become the U.S. attorney that battled in court to expel the Cherokee Indians onto the Trail of Tears.

 Although being branded as traitors by the Conservative spin doctors and cartoonists, Canadians who oppose the construction of the 731-mile-long Northern Gateway Pipeline are continuing the heroic tradition that motivated resistance to the American invasion in the War of 1812. Native nations such as the Gitga’at living along the coast of British Columbia hope to maintain a subsistence way of life based on the abundance of salmon, like the Sac and Fox of Illinois in 1812 attempted to save a way of life based on buffalo. Their vision of a B.C. coast protected from oil spills is as compelling as Catlin’s call for the perpetuation of another magnificent civilization.

The Standard’s cartoon also puts into disturbing context the Canadian government’s combined celebration of the War of 1812 and causing the Niagara Region to be recognized as part of these events, as our nation’s “Cultural Capital.” The making of our region as the Cultural Capital, like the Standard’s distorted cartoon, represent an effort to have Niagara become a testing ground for making the efforts those who want to protect the environment look like treason.

Over the next three years as the war of 1812 is celebrated, we can look forward to a number of distorted historical interpretations that equate environmentalism with American sponsored extremism and subversion.   Conservative spin doctors must be spinning out a monumental torrent of propaganda in all the diverse forms of high culture – plays about conniving Canadian tree huggers in 1812 colluding with American invaders to establish national parks, poems celebrating resistance to the imposition of U.S, eco-radicals, paintings celebrating how our affluent way of life was rescued from American wiles, posters of cars rising above slain bison, and a new version of the 1812 overture, combining the symphony in a Oratorio with a chorus proclaiming our rescue from the demise of American national parks.

A banner protesting plans for Northern Gateway pipeline from Alberta tarsands through native lands. Photo from Council of Canadians website.

Perhaps St. Catharines and Brock Universities new performing arts center will open with a gala grand opera on our heroic rescue from being an American park due to the courage of the gallant  red coats.

The prospect of federal arts funding in Niagara as a test pilot for a new thrust for Canadian culture is deeply disturbing. It however, is a sorry pattern of what Catlin deplored in 1832. He was dismayed over how powerful writers and artists would not give up such creature comforts as wine and cigars in cozy studies- to study the magnificence of the native way of life that was being assaulted by American armies. Today it seems that the Standard cartoonists are simply the vanguard of a similar attempt to use money to manipulate the cultural understanding of our times. Instead of artists struggling to save the beauty of the Pacific coast we will get a torrent of odes to oil.

 John Bacher in a St. Catharines, Ontario residents and long-time conservationist and member of the Niagara-based Preservation of Agricultural Lands Society.

 (We welcome you to share your views on this post. Please remember that we only post comments by people willing to share their real first and last names.)

Imagine a brand new prison in Niagara! Wouldn’t that be great?

Let’s put it this way. If we really believe, as Niagara Falls MP and Stephen Harper’s justice minister Rob Nicholson does, that we should be cracking down harder on law breakers, we ought to be the first ones in the country to welcome a new prison into our neighbhourhood, shouldn’t we?

Niagara Falls MP and federal Justice Minister Rob Nicholson is all for getting tougher on crime. Can he help bring a new prison to the region too?

So I am urging all of my fellow Niagarians to call or email the constituency offices of Rob Nicholson and all of our other MPs and MPPs. Let them know that we want the new prison that Ontario is going to need when the Harper government passes its get-tougher-on-crime bill and the courts start sentencing more people who get fresh with the law to jail time located right here in Niagara. After all, why should the Greater Toronto area get everything?

This new prison, according to recent news reports, would wall off about 1,000 cells and would cost about $900 million to build. Think of all of the construction jobs and all of the recession-proof jobs that would be created just to run the place. It would be a real boost to a Niagara, Ontario region that has had more than its share of business closings and job losses over the past number of years.

Yet wouldn’t you know it. Ontario’s premier, Dalton McGuinty, and his correctional services minister, Madeleine Meilleur, are already complaining about the cost of the prison, which the province would have to cover. Let them complain all they want. The Harper government has made it clear that the crime bill is a done deal. So we might just as well see that the prison, and all the money and jobs it will bring, goes here. And there are plenty of good places in Niagara to put a prison too.

The first place I thought of was near Marineland in Niagara Falls. Last time I drove by, there was all kinds of vacant land out there behind Marineland and good urban planners are always looking for new development that is compatible with the buildings that are nearby. In this case, you would have two places that hold captive mammals. Seems like a perfect fit and Justice Minister Nicholson would be able to brag that he got the prison in his riding.

 If that doesn’t work out, how about somewhere out in rural West Lincoln. There are a lot of good staunch Conservative supporters out there who would probably be proud to play host to a facility that stands for real punishment. And just think, their MPP, Tim Hudak, would have ready access to prisoners to form those chain gangs he was promising during last year’s provincial election.

We might also want to consider a site in south Niagara. Poor south Niagara often seems to be last on the list when the government is looking for a place to build something. Maybe the prison would make up for the hospital services residents in the south end have been losing. Then again, I can already hear them complaining that the convicts are getting better health care in the prison hospital than they are getting out in the community. So that won’t work.

But hey, speaking of hospitals, how about next to the super hospital the Niagara Health System is building in west St. Catharines?  There is a railway line nearby and since the new crime bill is going to mean a lot more people going to jail, they’ll be able to ship them in on freight cars. Maybe a deal could be struck with the NHS to let the lower-risk prisoners out during the day to clean the hospital wards. These days, you always have to be thinking about partnerships that can save the taxpayers a little money. And who knows, maybe they will do a good enough job of mopping and scrubbing the wards that the rates of C. difficile and other infectious diseases will go down. If they do, maybe we can soften up a bit and shave a little time off their sentence for good cleaning.

As good as all of this sounds, you have to know there’ll be at least a few selfish people out there who won’t want a prison near their backyard. Count on them to come up with every frivolous argument in the book for trying to keep a prison out of their neighbourhood. If (for example) they picked west St. Catharines for the prison, we’d have people living in those jumbo-size houses out there claiming it would hurt their property values. But if they can stand that jumbled mess of strip malls, big box stores and junk food drive-ins and all the snarled up traffic that comes with it out there, what difference is a prison going to make?

Forget more crime prevention. Just slam them in here.

Some of them – even those who cheered the idea of getting tougher on crime when they assumed the new prisons would go somewhere else – may also turn around and have the nerve to argue that we don’t need the crime bill and more prisons because statistics keep showing that crime rates across the country are going down.

They may even resort to the tired old line that what we should really be doing is focusing on crime prevention. But why should the rest of us have to put 12 extra locks on our doors, set leg traps in our hallways and go to bed with a baseball bat and can of pepper spray just because these people don’t want a prison in their backyard? If the good old U.S.A. can build enough jails to lock up as many as one out of every hundred of its citizens, why can’t Canada?

But never mind the soft-hearted wimps and naysayers. The good news is this. There isn’t a snowball’s chance that Harper, Nicholson and company are going to let crime statistics or anything else get in the way of following through on their crime-fighting mission. And don’t forget, there were enough of us out here who gave them the majority they needed in last year’s election to get the job done.

 So let’s make the best of it. If hundreds of millions of our tax dollars are going to be blown on new jails, let’s make sure those dollars blow our way. And I don’t want to hear anyone who has voted for this federal government and its war on crime turn around and say; ‘Yes, but don’t build the prison in my backyard. Build it in someone else’s”

 Let those of you who voted for this Harper government take responsibility when it follows through on the things they wanted it to do.

  (We welcome you to share your views on this post. Please remember that we only post comments by people willing to share their real first and last names.)

Each year Niagara, Ontario’s regional government presents awards to businesses, local municipalities and others that have carried out building and other projects that contribute to the aesthetics of urban and rural landscapes in our region, and to the quality of life in our communities.

The latest annual Niagara Community Design Awards were presented this January 25 in a banquet room in Thorold, Ontario and Niagara At Large is pleased to post the following news on them from the region, along with the list of recipients.

NIAGARA REGION, Jan. 26, 2012– The Niagara Community Design Award recipients were announced this January 25 at the Four Points by Sheraton in Thorold.

This year's Architecture Award winner - the new Niagara District Airport Terminal in Niagara-on-the-Lake, Ontario

This is the seventh year for the Region’s Niagara Community Design Awards which recognize and celebrate excellence in design in Niagara and that demonstrate the application of Smart Growth Principles. The awards continue to focus on projects that enhance the built environment, efficiently use land, and demonstrate creativity and vision.

The award categories include: Small Scale Project; Larger Scale Project; Public Realm Improvement; Architecture; Façade Improvement; Adaptive Re-use; Policy and Plans; and Leadership and Legacy.

This year’s recipients, by category, are:

 Small Scale Project o Honourable Mention: Lincoln County Humane Society, St. Catharines

 Larger Scale Project o Award: The Heatherwood Fine Residence, St. Catharines

o Honourable Mention: Market Hall, Brock University

o Honourable Mention: Scotiabank Convention Centre, Niagara Fa

Public Realm Improvement o Award: The City of Port Colborne Olde Humberstone Community Improvement Plan

o Award: City of Niagara Falls – Main and Ferry Business Improvement Area

 Architecture o Award: Niagara District Airport Terminal Building, Niagara-on the-Lake

o Honourable Mention: Family and Children’s Services Niagara, Niagara Falls

 Façade Improvement o Award: Patterson Funeral Home, Niagara Falls

o Honourable Mention: Cannery Park, Niagara-on the-Lake

 § Adaptive Re-use o Award: Inniskillin Wines, Niagara-on-the-Lake

o Honourable Mention: Hummel Properties Inc. Head Office, Niagara-on-the-Lake

o Honourable Mention: Valley Way Non-Profit Retirement Residence, Niagara Falls

 § Policy and Plans o Honourable Mention: Gateway Secondary Plan, Town of Fort Erie

o Honourable Mention: Central Business District Urban Design Policies, Town of Lincoln

  § Leadership and Legacy o Tony Continelli, Premium Building Group, St. Catharines

 For further details about this year’s award winners, and for more information on the Niagara Community Design Awards, please visit www.niagararegion.ca.

(Niagara At Large invites you to share your views on this post in the comment boxes below.)  

Those opposed to a natural gas drilling process called “fracking” because of the impact it could have on the environment, including the waters of the Niagara River and Lake Ontario, could find themselves coming up against a cheerleader for the process more formidable than the petro-chemical industry.

U.S. President Barack Obama on the "fracking" bandwagon during State of Union speech

 That cheerleader is none other than the president of the United States, Barack Obama.

 This January 24, during his State of the Union address to the U.S. Congress, Obama lauded the so-called fracking process (more technically known as “hydraulic fracturing”) for obtaining natural gas from underground layers of shale as a key to his country’s independence from Middle East oil and a practice that has the potential to create 600,000 American jobs.

 Opponents of fracking fear for any impact it may have on underground aquifers and on water in rivers and lakes where the industrial chemicals used to free up gas in the shale could potentially migrate

 In the greater Niagara region, voices have recently been raised by citizens on both sides of the Niagara River and by municipalities on the Ontario side like Niagara-on-the-Lake, St. Catharines, Thorold, Wainfleet and Fort Erie about plans to ship chemically-laced water from the fracking process to a wastewater plant in Niagara Falls, N.Y. for treatment and disposal in the Niagara River. Those voices were joined this past December by the Great Lakes and St. Lawrence Cities Initiation, a coalition of more than 80 U.S. and Canadian cities and towns, which called on provincial, state and federal governments in both countries to host public hearings on the potential impact of fracking on Great Lakes waters.

 So far there has been no response from upper levels of governments to the coalition’s call for hearings. And until Obama delivered his State of the Union address, there had been no real indication that the U.S. government would require petro-chemical companies to finally reveal all of the chemicals they are using in the fracking process.

 In the address, Obama said he “is requiring all companies that drill for gas on public lands to disclose the chemicals they use.” Whether that requirement will be extended to companies drilling on private lands in states like New York, Pennsylvania and Ohio remains to be seen.

 The president insisted that “America will develop this (natural gas) resource without putting the health and safety of our citizens at risk,” and he went on to declare that “the development of natural gas will create jobs and power trucks and factories that are cleaner and cheaper, proving that we don’t have to choose between our environment and our economy.”

A card calling for the banning of fracking in New York State. Visit www.nyagainstfracking.com to learn more.

 There has already been some negative response to Obama’s enthusiasm for fracking from the environmental community. Jennifer Krill, executive director of the American group Earthworks, stated that the president’s address “made no mention of a growing body of evidence that (using the process to drill for the gas) has serious known consequences, and much of those impacts have yet to be studied. Promoting gas production in the face of such evidence,” Krill added, “effectively prioritizes the profits of the oil and gas industry over the communities’ health, their drinking water, and the environment.”

 Environmentalists and others may find it very hard to get Obama to say no to any plans involving fracking though. Last week, he put the brakes on plans to build a pipeline to send crude from Canada’s tar sands in Alberta to oil refineries down in Texas out of concern that a proper environmental impact review had not been completed yet. That decision drew charges from his political opponents that he is risking the loss of tens of thousands of jobs and a significant source of energy.

 Imagine what an outcry there would be from his political opponents during a presidential election year if he said no to fracking projects too.

  (We welcome you to share your views on this post. Please remember that we only post comments by people willing to share their real first and last names.)

If you have been a regular visitor to our Niagara At Large news and commentary site, you know that we have shown an ongoing interest in the welfare of all creatures great and small.

Nature of Things host David Suzuki

Someone from the CBC knew about NAL’s passion for animals and sent us the following note on a program we’re sure many of you who share our panel will want to check out.

The program, featured on CBC’s long-running and ever-popular ‘The Nature of Things’ hosted by the one and only David Suzuki, is called  ‘Mysteries of the Animal Mind’ and is being broadcast this Thursday, January 26 at 8 p.m. EST on CBC Newsworld Cable channel 6. Niagara At Large is pleased to share the following write-up from CBC on this program.

Thursday, January 26 – Mysteries of the Animal Mind Any pet owner knows their cat, dog or budgie has feelings. But many scientists considered it absurd to entertain questions about how animals might feel or that they might be thinking—it was unacceptable to ascribe experiences like delight, boredom or self-awareness to non-humans. Now scientists are exploring the complex mysteries of the animal consciousness.

In Mysteries of the Animal Mind we meet the researchers who are finding growing evidence of compassion, cooperation, altruism, empathy, intelligence and communication in all sorts of different species. We’ll meet Diana Reiss of Hunter College who takes viewers underwater at the Baltimore Aquarium. There, her team witnesses the curious looks of the dolphins as they look into a mirror for the first time. She discovers that dolphins can recognize themselves—joining a select group known to have this ability.

Dr. Frans de Waal, one the world’s most widely recognized primatologists, shows viewers a group of chimpanzees who teach us we’re not the only species with a sense of fair play. And at Duke University, Brian Hare introduces us to bonobos, a close relative of ours, who will happily share food—even with a stranger.

(Niagara At Large invites you to share your comments on this fascinating topic before or after you have viewed the program.)

A Foreword by NAL publisher Doug Draper – Followed by Premier’s address

Ontario’s economy is growing and “now we need to take further action on another important front and that is the deficit,” said Premier Dalton McGuinty this January 24 during an address to the Canadian Club of Toronto.

Ontario Premier Dalton McGuinty

 “Tackling the deficit is simply an essential step in building the strong economy (that) supports good jobs and quality public services,” said McGuinty, adding that “borrowing money to help Ontarian through a terrible recession is one thing, but living beyone our means, constantly adding to the debt we are leaving to our children (is) quite another thing. That would be wrong for our children and for us.”

 McGuinty said that driving down a debt that now stands at $16 billion and ultimately balancing the province’s budget in the fiscal year 2017/2018 “won’t be easy (and) getting there will require that we slow down our spending significally.”

One thing his Liberal government won’t do, said the premier, is raise taxes and it will not compromise the quality of two of the “most important public services upon which families rely” – health care and education.

On the health-care front, McGuinty went on to say that health care accounts for more than 40 per cent of the province’s program spending and “is overflowing with opportunities for reform” and the government will soon introduce “an exiting plan for health-care transformation (that) will provide Ontarians with better health care by getting better value for our health-care dollars.”

Finally, the premier said that as much as he feels public sector workers must be “fairly compensated” for their work, and he believes they already are, something must be done to control public sector worker’s wages which add up to about $55 billion annually or half of all government spending. McGuinty didn’t go as far as Conservative leader Tim Hudak and talk about mandatory wage freezes and about making public sector workers compete with private sector workers for their jobs, he did say that the government intends to negotiate firmly” with the public sector over future wage contracts.

 Premier’s Remarks TO THE Canadian Club of Toronto

January 24, 2012

 Distinguished guests, ladies and gentleman, colleagues.

 J’aimerais commencer aujourd’hui par vous remercier pour votre travail, pour les emplois et les débouchés que vous offrez aux familles de la province et pour votre détermination à continuer de faire progresser l’Ontario.

 I want to start today by thanking all of you for the work you do, each in your own way, to help build a strong Ontario, supported by a strong economy.

Of course, my subject, today, is the economy. And more specifically, I want to talk about the next step in our plan to build a stronger Ontario economy, an economy that supports good jobs and quality public services for all of us.

I will begin by touching on the fundamentals, because they are the foundation for growth and prosperity. I am talking about our tax and regulatory environment, our power grid, our infrastructure and our workforce.

First, our tax environment. To make sure Ontario is competitive, we eliminated capital taxes and reduced corporate taxes. Our corporate tax rates are now lower than every U.S. state and lower than the OECD average. The long and the short of it is we’ve cut the tax rate on new business investment by almost half.  We’ve also adopted the HST, letting Ontario businesses compete on a level playing field with competitors in over 140 countries who already enjoyed the distinct advantage of a value-added tax. We’ve reduced personal income taxes for 93 percent of Ontarians who are now paying less in tax today than they did four years ago. What’s more, we’ve eliminated 80,000 business regulatory requirements that stood in the way of jobs and growth. We’ve aggressively expanded international trade, doubling our trade with India and China. And we continue to offer our strong support to the federal government as it seeks to enter into new trade agreements beyond North America.

The second fundamental we strengthened was our electricity system. Because we all understand that a reliable supply of electricity is the lifeblood of a growing economy. Our plan will rebuild 80 percent of the system over 20 years. Already, we’ve built over 5,000 kilometres of new transmission and 8,000 MW of new generation. At the same time, our energy policies have given birth to an exciting, renewable energy sector in Ontario, creating 20,000 jobs so far. Yes, there has been some controversy around our clean energy plan. But it’s especially important in matters of controversy that people know where you stand. Our government stands for clean energy, clean energy jobs and clean air. And we won’t waiver on that. We are going to keep moving forward with our clean energy plan, always looking for ways, of course, to improve it.

Just as we have kept moving forward on the third fundamental — and that’s infrastructure. Our work together has meant new hospitals, schools, roads, bridges, sewers and public transit. On average, we are investing three times as much in infrastructure every year as the previous government did — because we need it. In Toronto alone, we have construction underway on a subway to York University, a rail link to Pearson Airport and a rapid transit line across Eglinton. And I think everybody here would agree: there is still more to do.

This brings me to our fourth economic fundamental, and that is a strong workforce. It’s just a hard fact: you can’t compete in the race to the top without a highly skilled and educated workforce. So we have made dramatic, new investments in the education and skills of Ontarians ranging all the way from full-day kindergarten for our youngest learners all the way up to more grad school spaces. And the results, my friends, have been nothing short of breathtaking: our schools are now recognized as the best in the English-speaking world; our test scores and high school graduation rates are way up; enrolment in our colleges and universities is up by 26 percent — that’s double the increase in the rest of Canada; and our workforce is now better educated than any of the 34 OECD countries.

Ontario families know: education is a great investment. And to make that investment more affordable, we recently announced a 30 percent tuition grant. It will help 300,000 college and university students from low and middle-income families. It’s been said that while we can’t build the future for our kids, we can build our kids for the future. That’s what education is really all about. And I think it’s noteworthy that, just last year, as we were coming out of recession, while Ontarians with a high school education experienced a 9,000 jobs net loss, our college and university grads experienced a 119,000 jobs net gain. Our plan will keep making Ontario more competitive by making Ontarians themselves more competitive.

So, my friends, when you consider the fundamentals — our tax and regulatory environment, our power grid, our infrastructure and our workforce — we are stronger. Yes, of course, there’s more to do, but there is no doubt about it: we are stronger; we’re more competitive; we’re better poised for growth.

And when it comes to growth, the Ontario indicators are all pointing in the right direction. Our latest sounding has our economy growing at 2.7 percent. Unemployment has dropped from a high of 9.4 to 7.7 percent today. And our champions, like manufacturing and financial services, are experiencing steady growth. So we’re moving in the right direction on pretty much all the major fronts.

Now, we need to take further action on another important fundamental and that is the deficit. It stands at $16 billion this year. And it’s not going away on its own.

Nous devons prendre la prochaine mesure vitale pour créer une économie qui soutient de bons emplois et des services publics de qualité. Nous avons besoin de nous attaquer au déficit de l’Ontario.

Tackling the deficit is simply an essential step in building the strong economy we all want and need, one that supports good jobs and quality public services.

But before I get to what we need to do, I want to speak to how we got here and why it is we need to get out.

First, how did we get here? Before the global recession hit, Ontario had balanced three budgets in a row. We were in surplus. And you should know that to this very day our government spends the least per capita among Canada’s 10 provinces. But, just as the recession took a bite out of household budgets across Ontario, it took its toll on the provincial budget, too. Government revenues went down and the need for government support went up: support for workers who lost their jobs, for employers who needed help to keep jobs, and support for infrastructure projects to create jobs. All this extra help for Ontarians combined with weaker revenues created a $16 billion deficit. That’s how we got here.

So, why do we need to get out? Well, just as it was right for our government to run a deficit to protect Ontarians from the worst of an economic storm, so now that the storm is over, it’s right for you and I to rededicate ourselves to our plan to eliminate that deficit.  Borrowing money to help Ontarians through a terrible recession is one thing, but living beyond our means, constantly adding to the debt we are leaving to our children, well, that’s quite another thing. That would be wrong — for our children and for us.

I don’t have to tell you: when it comes to the economy, confidence is very important. If Ontarians see their government managing responsibly and keeping a steady hand on the tiller, just as they are doing at home and in business, they are going to feel more confident.  And when international businesses see that we are taking action, it gives them the confidence to invest here, bringing jobs to Ontario, for Ontario families. And if the lending community sees that we are tackling our deficit confidently and in earnest, it reassures them and that keeps our borrowing costs down. Confidence in our economy is an indispensable, economic fundamental. And eliminating the deficit is key to maintaining the confidence of Ontarians, and the world, and growing our economy. 

In the coming weeks, we will receive the advice of the Drummond Commission. Minister Duncan will also continue hearing from Ontarians as part of his pre-budget consultations. And we will welcome any thoughtful advice we receive from the opposition.

Éliminer le déficit ne sera pas une tâche aisée. Pour ce faire, nous devrons toutes et tous faire le maximum. Dans le cadre de la mise en œuvre de son plan certains prétendront que le gouvernement va trop vite, et d’autres qu’il progresse trop lentement.

Eliminating the deficit won’t be easy and getting the job done will call upon the very best we have to offer. I’m pretty sure that as our government moves forward with our plan some will say, ‘You’re moving too quickly.’ Others are going to say, ‘You’re moving too slowly.’ I think Wilfrid Laurier offered some pretty sound advice 120 years ago when he said: “…see the goal and towards that goal direct your efforts, discarding the impetuous frowns of the rash and the cautious advice of the timid.” So I want to assure Ontarians: we won’t be rash and we won’t be timid. Our progress will be steady, measured and relentless.

While the specific details of our plan will be laid out in our budget, in the balance of my remarks, I want to share with you some of the broader strokes. Our plan will balance the budget in the fiscal year 2017/2018. Getting there will require that we slow down our spending significantly. As I have said before, we will protect health care and education, the most important public services upon which families rely. We will not raise taxes. Instead, we will find ways, through reform, to deliver government services more efficiently.

Health care, which accounts for over 40 percent of program spending, is overflowing with opportunities for reform. Shortly, Minister Matthews will lay out an exciting plan for health care transformation. Quite simply, our plan will provide Ontarians with better health care by getting better value for our health care dollars.

And speaking of dollars, one half of all government spending — about 55 billion dollars — is invested in wages and salaries. That’s not at all unusual. In fact, that’s as it should be. Most taxpayer dollars should go into paying the people who work on the front lines and deliver the services — like our nurses, our doctors, our teachers, our water and meat inspectors. We need them and we need them to do a good job. That means they need to be well trained and fairly compensated. And they are.

 But because half the province’s budget is spent on wages, it is just not possible to reduce spending without addressing salary expenditures. We will do that by respecting the collective bargaining process. Respect isn’t something you check at the door in the face of a big challenge. In fact, it’s when things get difficult that you need it the most. Now, just as we will respect the people who deliver our public services, so will we also respect the right of all Ontario families to a government that is fiscally responsible, one that maintains confidence in the economy they depend on for their jobs, their schools, their health care, their future. So we will negotiate firmly to a result that keeps us on a sure and steady path to a balanced budget, something that is in everyone’s interest.

Of course, our plan to achieve our goal of living within our means is a multi-year plan. It can’t be achieved overnight. There are no quick fixes. There are no easy solutions. Success will take time and an unwavering commitment. And I have every confidence we will achieve our goal because Ontarians have everything it takes to get there, including our track record in getting the fundamentals right — our workforce, our taxes and our infrastructure.

But there is another fundamental strength we possess as Ontarians, one that underlies all our great successes: and that is our willingness to work and build together. Think about this: together we built our schools, our colleges, our universities — the foundation of our powerful workforce and our research excellence. We built our health care system from the neighbourhood clinic to our world class teaching hospitals with access for everybody. We built our communities, safe, strong and growing, because newcomers from around the world keep choosing Ontario as the best place to begin a new life. We built our truly remarkable system of roads and highways, covering a geography, by the way, four times the size of the UK to serve a population one fifth their size. We built a vital and peaceful democracy where the strong and the weak, the rich and the poor, each get one vote. And, together, we built a strong, caring, progressive society inspired by the ideal that every child from every home will have every opportunity to become the best they can be.

That’s what Ontarians have achieved. It’s nothing short of amazing. And our future is equally bright so long as we keep working and building together.

My friends, Ontarians have placed their confidence in our government to keep a steady hand on the tiller and steer us towards a stronger economy. And that is exactly what we are going to do. We will keep strengthening our economic fundamentals. We will eliminate our deficit. And we will maintain confidence in our economy.

This is about a lot more than a dry exercise to satisfy accountants. It’s about satisfying the real expectations of Ontario families that their economy will inspire their confidence, and the world’s confidence, too. It’s about building the rock-solid foundation families need to support their jobs, their schools, their health care, their future. It’s about acting responsibly. It’s about building a bright future for our children and grandchildren. It’s about staying strong and being who we are. We are Ontario. We’re the greatest province in the best country in the world.

 Thank you.

 (Niagara At Large invites you to share your comments on this post below. Please remember that NAL, as liberal as we (compared to other media) in terms of what we post here, only accepts comments by those who also share their real first and last names with their views, and we reserve the right not to post remarks that are over the top in terms of personal attacks against individuals.)