What can we do about rural New Brunswick?

The Gagetown Village Council hosted an all-candidates debate last Thursday. The first question was provided. My response follows.

Question:
Gagetown and many other rural areas of the province are going through very hard times. Businesses and government services are shutting down and moving to larger centres. Unemployment is high with little or no prospect of local jobs in people’s futures. Population growth is nil and in many communities declining drastically. With a stagnant population even our schools are at risk. If you are elected as our Member of Parliament, what do you plan to do to rectify this situation and to revitalize rural communities?

Response:
There are many forces bearing down on rural communities, some of which are beyond our control. Some, however, are the direct result of public policy and therefore can be rectified.
The biggest factor in rural decline has been government policies in natural resource sectors – agriculture, forestry and fisheries – that have restructured these industries so that small-scale independent enterprises cannot survive. This is the result of a combined cheap food – export-oriented commodity focus which requires large industrial scale operations that receive government subsidies and privileged access to public resources to compete. This export commodity focus, reinforced by free trade agreements – first NAFTA, now the Canada Europe Trade Agreement being negotiated – have gutted rural economies and government services have followed.

The Green Party would turn this around. We would deliberately adopt policies that encourage and protect small scale owner-operator farms and forest enterprises directed towards local and regional markets and wean us off export dependence. If agriculture, fishing and forest economies are strong locally, then other businesses and services will follow.
We view food as a national security issue and therefore deserving of special treatment. New Brunswick used to be largely food self-sufficient. Today we import 80 percent of the food sold here, much of which travels an average of 1200 kilometres from source to plate. Our goal is regional self-sufficiency in food staples.
• NAFTA and CETA contain measures that prevent local food procurement preferences. CETA would prohibit seed-saving and supply management systems. We would reject CETA outright – it would devastate what is left of family agriculture in New Brunswick. We would renegotiate NAFTA to allow government procurement of local food for schools, hospitals, etc. Government purchasing can be a huge driver of local production.
• We would intervene directly to provide in-province or Maritime killing plants for livestock.
• We would assist to develop alternative marketing and distribution systems.
• We would protect existing agricultural supply management systems and fix the huge problem we have now in poultry in this province.
• We would de-commoditize production quotas so young people can get into farming incurring huge debt to get quotas.
• We would work with agricultural sectors to expand cooperative and single desk systems or supply management systems.
• We would allow farmers who sell directly to the customer to operate outside supply management.
• We would provide funding and extension support for conventional farmers to move towards more sustainable organic production and we would invest in marketing to support this.
• We would provide support for local producers and businesses to reduce their energy use and greenhouse gas emissions.
• We would invest in locally owned energy cooperatives to produce and sell renewable energy, especially wood biomass to provide alternative markets for private woodlots, and we would assist in developing marketing and distribution systems and conversions of heating systems.
• We would invest massively in energy efficiency programs which would create jobs in all sectors across the entire province while reducing energy demand, reducing pollution, and saving everyone money.
• We would fund these measures by removing subsidies from oil, gas and nuclear.
• We would reduce the cost to small businesses of hiring staff by reducing payroll taxes – CPP and EI premiums – and fund this through a pollution tax on big carbon emitters.
• We would invest in rural public transportation so people can remain in rural communities and have access to services they need in larger centres.
• We would invest in community infrastructure (three community super-funds to address water, sewage, flood control, energy, recreation, and other public amenities).
• Our Young Citizens Initiative would provide minimum wage jobs for young people (18-25) in their communities.

Media as ‘Reality’ Creator

Refusing to allow Elizabeth May into the leaders debate is one symptom, albeit a big one, of the larger problem of the media in Canadian politics. While we thankfully don’t have the crazies and hatemongers on the airwaves as the Americans do, we have a media – private and public alike – that is content to be used by Stephen Harper as a messenger for his fear mongering, manipulation and truth-bending. The Harper machine churns out the messaging in private events – no dissenters allowed – which are dutifully broadcast to the nation intact and unchallenged. Last night (Sunday) The National finally aired an eminent scholar on parliamentary government who said that Harper mislead the Canadian public in 2008 with his characterization of his failure to gain the confidence of Parliament and the subsequent effort by the Liberals and NDP to offer themselves to the Governor-General as an alternative, a perfectly legitimate act meant to give the GG an alternative to calling an election. To prevent this move, which he knew was completely legitimate, Harper instead asked the GG to close Parliament – which she could have refused to do but didn’t – allowing him time to launch a nation-wide propaganda campaign demonizing all parties involved and lying about the BQ being part of the coalition. Harper played the media, and thus the country, like a fiddle, and has done so ever since. The reason is, the media has as little interest in and understanding of our system of government as most Canadians. More troubling, they have no sense of their own responsibility to blow the whistle when the Prime Minister is clearly not telling the truth.

CBC has made a lacklustre efforts during this campaign to suggest perhaps the PM’s view of Parliament isn’t quite kosher. But it is far too late now to start shedding light on his tactics. The damage was done during the 2008 fiasco and has been perpetuated. Now, one week before the election, the PM is on a roll and nothing is going to break through his impenetrable image. As I watch the media reports of his campaign I see self-righteous, smug journalists believing they are doing a service to the Canadian public, while being led around by the nose by Harper’s machine.
If Harper earns a majority next Monday, he can credit the media for it. Without them as willing dupes, it wouldn’t be possible.

THE ISSUES WE REALLY NEED TO TALK ABOUT

I HAVE LEFT THE MY FIRST TWO CANDIDATE DEBATES WITH A SENSE OF CONCERN – THAT THE ISSUES THAT WILL DEFINE THE NEXT FEW DECADES IN THIS RIDING, OUR PROVINCE AND CANADA ARE NOT BEING RAISED. SO I WANT TO PUT THESE ISSUES ON THE TABLE.

1. THE CLIMATE CRISIS WILL BE THE SINGLE LARGEST DETERMINANT OF THE QUALITY OF OUR CHILDREN’S AND GRANDCHILDREN’S FUTURE. WHAT IS OUR RESPONSIBILITY TO THEIR FUTURE TO CONTRIBUTE TO A SOLUTION TODAY? WHAT DO WE NEED TO DO LOCALLY TO ADAPT TO THE NEW NORMAL OF INTENSE STORMS, SEA LEVEL RISE, AND LOSS OF BIRDS, BATS AND POLLINATORS?

2. OUR ECONOMY AND OUR PERSONAL LIVES ARE COMPLETELY DEPENDENT ON PLENTY OF CHEAP OIL. THOSE DAYS ARE GONE. HOW ARE WE GOING TO REDESIGN OUR ECONOMY, COMMUNITIES, TRANSPORTATION, AND FOOD SYSTEMS TO BREAK OUR OIL ADDICTION AND STILL FLOURISH?

3. THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE LIVING IN POVERTY, FROM CHILDREN TO SENIORS, CONTINUES TO GROW AND THE SUPPORTS THEY HAVE ARE SHRINKING. WHAT IS OUR RESPONSIBILITY AS A COUNTRY TO PROTECT THE MOST VULNERABLE AND MAKE SURE THEY CAN PARTICIPATE FULLY IN THE LIFE OF OUR COMMUNITIES?

4. WHAT ARE WE GOING TO DO ABOUT POINT LEPREAU? THE SITUATION IN JAPAN IS THE LATEST REMINDER OF THE DANGERS ASSOCIATED WITH NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS AND THE RADIOACTIVE WASTE THEY PRODUCE. WE CAN’T AFFORD THE BILLIONS OF DOLLARS BEING SPENT ON THE REFURBISHMENT. IS IT TIME TO MOVE ON TO SAFER, CHEAPER ALTERNATIVES?

5. WE HAVE TOO MANY INDUSTRIES THAT CANNOT BE PROFITABLE WITHOUT POLLUTING OUR AIR AND WATER AND DEGRADING HABITAT. PEOPLE ARE GETTING SICK AND SPECIES ARE DISAPPEARING AS A RESULT. HOW CAN WE END THE TRADE-OFF BETWEEN JOBS AND ENVIRONMENT?

6. THE ST. CROIX RIVER, PASSAMAQUODDY BAY AND THE BAY OF FUNDY ARE SICK FROM DECADES OF OVERFISHING, HABITAT DESTRUCTION AND POLLUTION. WHAT IS OUR RESPONSIBILITY TO PREVENT FURTHER DECLINE AND RESTORE SOME OF WHAT HAS BEEN LOST?

IN SHORT, WHAT ARE WE LEAVING FOR OUR CHILDREN, AND HOW ARE WE CARING FOR THE MOST VULNERABLE AMONG US?

THESE ARE BIG QUESTIONS THAT REQUIRE MAJOR COMMITMENTS FROM POLITICAL LEADERS AT ALL LEVELS, AND THE PARTICIPATION OF EVERY CITIZEN. THESE ARE THE QUESTIONS THAT I HAVE SPENT MY ADULT LIFE WORKING ON, AND AM COMMITTED TO ADDRESS, WHETHER OR NOT YOU ELECT ME AS YOUR MP.

THANK YOU.

Platform Launched

Janice Harvey, who is carrying the federal Green Party banner in the riding of New Brunswick Southwest, says she is excited by the Municipal Superfunds Green Leader Elizabeth May announced today during the Party’s platform launch in Toronto.

“We are in desperate need of public transportation, affordable housing and upgrades to our water and sewage systems in NB Southwest,” said Harvey. “The Green Party’s Municipal Superfunds will be a source of much needed investment in our communities, now that the economic stimulus money has dried up” she said.

According to the Green Party Platform the Superfunds would be funded by cancelling the corporate tax cuts planned by the Harper government and closing existing loopholes for tax havens.

“With the increasingly high costs of driving and given its contribution to climate change, we need public transportation infrastructure so people can get to work, attend to their appointments, and visit friends and family without having to get into their vehicle,” said Harvey.

The Green Party wants to create six Municipal Superfunds to: 1) support public transportation; 2)improve drinking water supplies and sewage treatment; 3) support sports, cultural and recreational facilities; 4) create affordable housing; 5) provide cycling infrastructure; and 6) clean-up contaminated land for development.

The platform is available at: http://greenparty.ca/platform2011

- 30 -

Municipal Superfund Plan is Exciting

I am excited by the Municipal Superfunds Green Leader Elizabeth May announced today during the Party’s platform launch in Toronto.

 

We are in desperate need of public transportation, affordable housing and upgrades to our water and sewage systems in NB Southwest.  The Green Party’s Municipal Superfunds will be a source of much needed investment in our communities, now that the economic stimulus money has dried up.

 

According to the Green Party Platform the Superfunds would be funded by cancelling the corporate tax cuts planned by the Harper government and closing existing loopholes for tax havens.

 

With the increasingly high costs of driving and given its contribution to climate change, we need public transportation infrastructure so people can get to work, attend to their  appointments, and visit friends and family without having to get into their vehicle.

 

The Green Party wants to create six Municipal Superfunds to: 1) support public transportation; 2)improve drinking water supplies and sewage treatment; 3) support sports, cultural and recreational facilities; 4) create affordable housing; 5) provide cycling infrastructure; and 6) clean-up contaminated land for development.

 

The platform is available at: http://greenparty.ca/platform2011

 

Voice Your Opinion on the Exclusion of Elizabeth May from the Televised Debates.

If you are as upset as we are that the television consortium has decided not to allow Elizabeth May to participate in the national televised debates, then make your voice heard.  You can send emails to:

CTV – Wendy Freeman President of News   wendy.freeman@ctv.ca
CTV – News Managing Editor Dennis McIntosh Dennis.McIntosh@ctv.ca
CBC Jennifer McGuire General manager and Chief of News  Jennifer.McGuire@cbc.ca
Global – Troy Reeb  troy.reeb@shawmedia.ca
TVA – Serge Fortin rédacteur en chef, au service de l’information de TVA Serge.Fortin@tva.ca

Send this text message, “We Want Democracy” to the Chair of the Consortium, Mr. Troy Reeb of Global TV, at 647-261-3752

Sign the Petition at www.DemandDemocracticDebates.ca

Tweet your outrage, include #EMayIN as the hashtag along with #GPC.

Grab the banner from DemandDemocraticDebates.Ca for your lawn signs.

I’m Off and Running

For Immediate Release: March 28, 2011

 

Contact:

Liz Neve, CEO, NB Southwest EDA, 529-8354

Janice Harvey, Candidate: 466-4033 (home); 321-0022 (cell)

 

NB Green Party President to Carry Green Banner in NB Southwest

Long time environmental activist and president of the New Brunswick Green Party Janice Harvey will carry the federal Green Party banner in the riding of New Brunswick Southwest in the federal election campaign.

 

Liz Neve, CEO of the NB Southwest riding association made the announcement today.  “We are very pleased that Janice will represent our party in this riding.  She brings experience, knowledge and personal conviction to the candidacy, making her a very credible voice for the vision of the Green Party,” said Neve.

 

Harvey also ran in the 2010 provincial election campaign, representing the New Brunswick Green Party in the riding of Charlotte-Campobello.

 

“We need a politics that understands the links between the environmental crisis, the growing gap between rich and poor, and the kind of economy we have,” said Harvey.  “The Green Party is the only party that offers a vision of a new economy and strong communities that will ensure a viable future for our children.  I am running as a candidate because it is very important that people in NB Brunswick Southwest have the opportunity to vote for this vision on May 2nd.”

 

According to Neve, the NB Southwest Green campaign will depend heavily on social networking to get their message out to the electorate.  “This is a huge riding geographically, and we can’t possibly compete with the old parties financially.  So our emphasis will be on all-candidates meetings wherever they are organized, and social networking,” she said.

 

Harvey is a native of Grand Manan and has lived in Waweig, Charlotte County, for the past 19 years.  She worked for the Conservation Council of New Brunswick for 25 years, has been a weekly columnist for the Telegraph Journal for the past 15 years, and more recently has been a member of CBC Radio’s Friday political panel.  In 2007 she returned to university to do graduate studies and teach.  She is currently studying in the Interdisciplinary PhD program at UNB, and teaching at Renaissance College, UNB and in the Environment and Society Programme at St. Thomas.  She and her husband David Coon have two teenage daughters, Caroline and Laura.

 

- 30 -

 

The Harper Vision is Clear

The federal government has the means and the constitutional responsibility to make sure Canadians enjoy reasonably comparable services and opportunities wherever they live. Universal childcare is central to poverty reduction and providing women equality of opportunity. A more robust Canada Pension Plan is crucial to seniors’ quality of life. Meaningful investments in education, health, clean water, public transportation, environmental restoration, and transition to a green economy are pillars of our future. None of these nation- and community-building measures were offered in the Harper budget.

Instead, we have a broad smattering of small-ticket items designed to buy votes in targeted population segments, while hiding where the real money will be spent – building prisons, buying fighter jets, and delivering corporate tax cuts.

The Harper vision is clear. Keep government small when it comes to people (don’t invest in poverty reduction and crime prevention), and big when it comes to the military, crime and punishment, and corporate welfare.

The approach is cynical and manipulative. It tears at the soul of our country by pandering to our worst instincts and starving our best. The federal budget fails the test of responsible, compassionate nation-building.

Environment still is not a ballot-box issue

I teach a third year environmental policy course at St. Thomas University. Since the term began in the midst of an election campaign, the various parties’ platforms – particularly the way they dealt with environmental matters – were an obvious topic for examination. In an assignment, I asked the students to review the platforms of three parties – the Liberals, PCs and the NDP – for evidence of ‘party politicization’ of the environment.

The idea of ‘party politicization’ of an issue is that as it becomes important or salient within the voting public, it becomes a point of competition among the parties in a bid for voter support. This competition is usually reflected in the party platforms and major campaign speeches.

(I did not include the Green Party platform in the class assignment. Since it is based on the view that the economy, indeed all of society, are subsystems of the environment and therefore need to be organized so they don’t undermine what keeps the planet ticking, the idea of party politicization of the environment doesn’t really apply to the Greens.)

Needless to say, economic growth was the overriding priority in the election campaign and party platforms. On the other end of the spectrum, the environment stands out as the least competitive among all policy areas. The platform writers for the three traditional parties did not deem the environment of high enough priority among New Brunswick voters to warrant more than a token gesture.

The NDP platform went much further than the Liberals and Conservatives in highlighting some critical environmental issues; even so, it couched concerns largely in economic terms. This suggests that within the NDP command structure, there are environmentalists who made sure the platform addressed certain pressing issues, yet to appeal to the public the final arbiters of platform content made sure these issues were dealt with in an economic context.

My point here is not to debate the content of party platforms, but to address the question of public salience of the environment as an issue. Obviously the big two – Liberals and Tories – felt very confident in giving issues like climate change, species extinctions, clear-cutting, nuclear power, toxic emissions from smokestacks, pesticides in aquaculture, and hydrofracking short shrift in the campaign. Nobody was asking about these issues at the door, even though, if asked, many people would express a concern for one thing or another. Neither party was punished by the electorate for ignoring these issues.

Yet our province faces daunting challenges in the coming years that we ignore at our peril. The changing climate is going to change everything, the most immediate being the public price tag of compensating shore landowners who lose homes and trying to protect coastal infrastructure from rising sea levels. A low-key story in last Friday’s paper reported on a million-dollar project near Aulac to restore a mere 16 hectares of salt marsh in front of a dyke as a buffer against storm surges. It’s a minuscule gesture compared to billion-dollar investment that will have to be made in this region as sea levels rise and storms intensify due to climate change.

This week, under the auspices of the United Nations, the world has gathered in Japan to negotiate targets under the Biodiversity Convention to try to stem the tide of species extinctions and ecosystem destruction attributed to ever-expanding resource exploitation and climate change. Canada’s national report to this meeting is sobering (see Environment Canada’s website). Here’s just a sample of the bad news.

Twenty per cent of native amphibians and 18 per cent of freshwater fish are at risk of extinction, yet clear-cutting continues. Marine ecosystems on all three coasts have been seriously compromised, yet the aquaculture industry is allowed to use pesticides on their sites. Half of all shorebird species are in decline; algal blooms have increased in lakes and estuaries. Forty per cent of birds associated with open habitats are at risk of extinction, yet industrial agriculture expands.

Does anyone really think this is OK? None of these symptoms are the result of one activity or event. They are the cumulative result of the way our industrial economy has been organized over the past 50 years. To solve the problem will require a new politics, which can envision a new approach to economic development. But this will only happen when the voting public decides to make the state of our planet – and what we are leaving our children – an issue they take to the ballot box.