Women dominate AMK_ballot this election

Riding joins international trend

by Lindsay Kelly

MANITOULIN-With three of four candidates running in the upcoming federal election being women, the Algoma-Manitoulin-Kapuskasing riding has never before seen this kind of gender diversity.

The inclusion of more women in Canadian politics is one that's welcomed by local candidates and part of a larger trend reflected across Canada. But there is still work to be done before the demographic is truly reflective of this country's population.

Women were granted the right to run as candidates in federal elections in 1920, yet their journey to attain equity in the political arena has been a slow one. In 1921, the first year for which there are recorded numbers, only four women were elected. It took nearly a decade before that number reached the double digits, with the number of women holding federal seats numbered 10, and by 1953, 47 women claimed seats in federal ridings. The election of women to federal government reached its zenith in 1993, when 476 women candidates were elected, the majority of which (113) ran for the NDP. Currently, 445 women hold seats in federal ridings.

According to Equal Voice, a multi-partisan, non-profit organization advocating for the election of more women to all levels of Canadian government, 52 percent of the country's population is made up of women, yet on average, only 21 percent of women sit on municipal councils, provincial legislatures and in the House of Commons, and that number has remained stagnant since 1993.

"How can a democracy be deemed legitimate if it fails to represent half its population?" Equal Voice questions. "Canadians value fairness and equality. We have decided that democracy should be a genuine partnership of men and women. To this end, we adopted a Charter of Rights and Freedoms that reinforces this belief by guaranteeing equality for women. Despite these values, women still encounter barriers to public office."

AMK Liberal candidate Brent St. Denis, the sole male candidate for this riding, welcomes the opportunity to run against three women-a first for the incumbent MP.

"It is wonderful and inspiring to me and to the women around me in my life, including my three daughters, to see a higher percentage of women running in politics at all levels," he said. "I am honoured to run against these women and wish to pay tribute to them all for engaging themselves in political life in their attempts to make Canada a truly fairer, richer and greener country."

Mr. St. Denis points to women like Green Party leader Elizabeth May, Parti QuÉbÉcois leader Pauline Marois, former prime minister Kim Campbell and former NDP leader and current MP Alexa McDonough as positive role models for young women seeking leadership roles. He also suggested that efforts by his own party have gone a long way to create an equal playing ground for women entering politics.

"Thanks to Belinda Stronach, Diane Marleau and the entire National Liberal Women's caucus, women's groups have an even stronger voice in parliament with the development of the Liberal Pink Book, a framework to advance women's equality across our country," Mr. St. Denis said. "All of these great women have inspired the next generation of Canadian women to write new chapters of our collective history with bold strokes."

Though she is "encouraged" by the larger number of women running for election, Green Party candidate Lorraine Rekmans believes that it will ultimately be the party and its policies that set the tone for the future political climate.

"I chose to be a candidate for the Green Party because it represents my value system," she said. "We do not have a 'war chest,' we do not feel we need to attack other party members.  We are concerned about our country in its entirety.  We, both men and women, will work co-operatively to solve the problems this country faces."

Having said that, however, Ms. Rekmans does believe that women could greatly influence the election outcome simply by showing up to cast their ballot.

"I think that if more women of all ages and income levels turn out at the polls to vote, this could indicate that more women are becoming engaged in politics in Canada," she said. "I believe that if more women voted they could greatly influence both the outcomes of our election and the work done in parliament."

This would  be a welcome change, since Canada currently sits in 51st place amongst the Interparliamentary Union's rankings of women in politics, behind countries like Rwanda (which earned the top spot), Afghanistan (27th) and the United Arab Emirates (44th).

They're shocking statistics to Ms. Rekmans, who believes that an increase in the number of women candidates elected to parliament could signal a change in the way politics are done in Canada.

"I do think that when we have more women candidates, and more elected women parliamentarians, we are more likely to approach the work of governing this country in a less adversarial manner," she said. "That would be a refreshingly positive change."

Though she did not comment on her perspective on the AMK riding, NDP candidate Carol Hughes noted that the NDP has a high percentage of women running across the country, all of whom are eager to help strive for equality amongst Canadian women.

"Equally as important as having women run for office is having women in office who will fight for what matters most to northern families," she said. "New Democrats have a caucus team that is 40 percent women-the highest of any party in parliament-and we are helping to lead the struggle for equality for women at home, at work and in society."

Included in their campaign platform is a promise to improve equity for women at work, a national child-care program, and more funds for shelters and transition houses for women who are victims of domestic violence.

Ms. Hughes also pledged to support Native healing centres and educational and training opportunities, and build more affordable housing to help women escaping violence. The NDP will also reinstitute the annual consultation between the Department of Justice and women's groups on ending violence against women and improve women's access to the legal system.

"New Democrats will empower federal agencies like the Status of Women Canada to implement the recommendations of the UN's report on the status of women in Canada, by properly funding Status of Women Canada, re-investing in women's programs and organizations who had funding cut by the Harper government," Ms. Hughes added.

Finally, she said the NDP would work to create a UN Women's Agency to advocate for women's concerns within the international community.

The Liberals also have a plan for encouraging equality for women, including reinstating funding for the Status of Women envelope and the Court Challenges Program.

Mr. St. Denis also points to the promise made by StÉphane Dion to ensure that by the next general election a third of the Liberal team would be comprised of women. The party reported that 27.7 percent of women were registered as candidates by the close of nominations this year-an increase of 44 women candidates since 2006.

"Our female candidates represent a wide range of professionals and come from all walks of life," Mr. St. Denis noted. "Our candidates are scientists, entrepreneurs, teachers, writers, social activists and doctors who come from all kinds of backgrounds. They bring to the Liberal Party and this election a new vision for our country that all voters, women or men, can agree with."

The Greens believe their value system will resonate with women, and voters in general, and one of the party's primary goals is to change the electoral system from first-past-the-post model to proportional representation to better reflect voters' preferences.

"We will also work to close the wage gap between men and women, to provide more daycare, to support families and seniors, to raise the minimum wage and to institute a guaranteed livable income," Ms. Rekmans added.

Group of citizens, motocross riders formed

to deal with neighbourhood noise concerns

by Jim Moodie

PROVIDENCE BAY-A dust-up between motocross riders and residents who resent the noise made at a nearby track stands a better chance of being settled now that a committee has been struck to address the concerns of both camps.

About 200 people congregated in Providence Bay last Tuesday for a meeting convened by Central Manitoulin Township to explore issues regarding the motocross course, which was built on property near the fair grounds owned by the Providence Bay Agricultural Society.

Margo Hendricks, who spoke at the meeting on behalf of about 20 village residents with noise complaints, said she had previously sent letters to Reeve Richard Stephens to explain her group's point of view, while qualifying that there was "never a petition," as was suggested in a letter to this paper last week.

She believes this communication with the township, as well as comments made in the community, precipitated last week's session. "After so many people voiced concerns, the reeve decided a public meeting should occur," said Ms. Hendricks.

The Prov resident stressed that "we're not against motocross as a sport," noting that her own son rode a dirt bike in his youth. "Our concern is with the noise and the fact that the track was built without any community input."

Providence Bay is a "tourist community," said Ms. Hendricks. "And more than that, it's become a retirement community, with people moving here for the peace and quiet." The incessant revving of dirt bikes is a detriment, she said, to the experience of those hoping to find a haven from noise and commotion.

"It was stated at the meeting that (one dirt bike) creates 98.6 decibels" of noise, said Ms. Hendricks. "Add to that 12 riders per race."

In her understanding, it's extremely rare for a race track to be built within the limits of a village or town, precisely because the noise can be offensive to residents. And she feels that it's particularly unfair that races and practices occur on Sundays, a day which "is supposed to be a quiet day for people to sit on their deck and relax."

Julie Deschamps, secretary/treasurer of the agricultural society, said that her organization doesn't have much say in the race dates, as these are dictated by the Canadian Motosport Racing Club (CMRC). "We're part of a Canada-wide circuit, and we don't have a choice about the Sundays," she said, while stressing that "we only hold three races a year."

One of those races occurs during the Providence Bay Fair weekend, and acts as a significant boost to the annual festival, said Ms. Deschamps. "It certainly draws more people to the fair," she said.

In general, she believes the track has been a positive addition to the community. "In my opinion, it's done a lot of good," she said. "It benefits he fair, the public and the Manitoulin Dirt Riders Association."

Businesses benefit too. "I know from talking to Jim McCormick of Papa's Meats that he really likes it when a race is going on," noted Ms. Deschamps.

The ag society rep is far from alone in this assessment, as most of the people at last week's meeting expressed support for the facility. Even Ms. Hendricks admitted that her group represented a distinct minority. "We were probably outnumbered 20 to 1," she remarked.

The track critic believes the numbers were skewed a bit, however, by an influx of motocross enthusiasts from outside the community, and an absence of summer visitors, many of whom have an issue with the racket created by the bikes.

And while she says she "could live with just three races a year," the problem, she said, is that the din occurs much more frequently than that, as the track is also available three days per week for practices. And one of those days is the Sabbath.

"Our group feels it's unacceptable that practices ever be on a Sunday," said Ms. Hendricks. "Tuesdays and Thursdays are tolerable, but Sunday afternoon practices are intolerable."

Ms. Deschamps appreciates that the noise can be bothersome, noting that her own organization had to make some adjustments during the fair weekend to ensure that horses weren't spooked by the whine of engines. But she also pointed out that the track, carefully maintained by volunteers, is hugely popular with local riders, some of whom have posted impressive results on the CMRC circuit.

"Five local people are in the top 3 of their respective classes," she pointed out. "So those practices are benefiting our riders."

Participation in the races has grown each year, she added. "When the races first started, it was a big deal to have 40 riders in the qualifying race," she said. "This year we had over 100. And at the fair, we had 123 riders."

Entry fees paid by those competitors goes into a kitty that the agricultural society uses to pay off its investment in the course, which was partially funded by a Trillium grant but otherwise underwritten by the society, which acquired land adjacent to the fair grounds in order to build the track.

Ms. Deschamps said that some efforts have been made to reduce noise. "This year we tried to control the revving of bikes before the race," she noted. "If someone is speeding around the site and revving unnecessarily, they have to walk their bike to the starting line. That's cut down a lot on the noise."

The agricultural society will now likely dip into the modest profits realized this year to build a fence around the facility and install a proper gate, said Ms. Deschamps, which would keep out random riders who are using the site without paying a membership to the dirt riders association. This, too, should help to reduce the din.

For Ms. Hendricks, the ideal scenario would be if the track was relocated to a more isolated spot, out of earshot of the village, but she doesn't really expect that to occur. "The fair board put a lot of money into that site," she acknowledged.

If it came to the point that a new race course needed to be developed somewhere else, Ms. Deschamps said that the agricultural society would likely not be involved. "Anything is possible-it could be moved," she said. "But I don't think we would be part of it. We went through all the rigamarole to get it approved by the CRMC and built to certain specifications, at significant expense and a lot of work, and we're not a young society."

Some suggestions to reduce the track noise were made at the meeting, but few seem practicable. Apparently you can't stick a muffler on a dirt bike without hampering performance, and a buffer of noise-deflecting trees would take some time to grow. Stacking up hay bales would be a really bad idea, as sparks from the bikes might ignite the straw.

Ms. Hendricks isn't expecting a miracle, or trying to drive the dirt bikers entirely out of town. But she does feel that some steps can be taken to appease residents like herself who find the activity a bit hard on the ears.

"We're just looking for mutual respect here," she said. "We think there can be a compromise and some reasonable changes. The track is getting bigger every year. Our concern is that there is managed responsibly so that the needs of the town are met as well as the needs of the racers and the fair board."

After everyone had their say at the public meeting, a decision was made to strike a committee to discuss the issue further and report back to the township with recommendations.

The committee is composed of two representatives of the dirt riders' association, one member of the fair board, a citizen who will represent those with noise concerns, and an individual who can speak for the business community.

Federal government examines privatizing mail system

by Jim Moodie

OTTAWA-It isn't an issue that has been raised much during this election campaign-or aired much otherwise, for that matter-but it's one that could have a significant impact on rural Canada.

A few days before the election call in early September, the deadline quietly passed for submissions to a review of Canada Post that was commissioned by the Harper government in June. This reassessment of the crown corporation's operations is expected to be completed, regardless of the election outcome, by the end of this year.

Among the options being considered by the three-member advisory panel overseeing the study is deregulation of the letter market, which would allow private companies to compete for a service that, to date, has been the exclusive privilege of Canada Post.

Such a scenario, say critics, would severely compromise the quality and affordability of mail delivery in non-urban corners of the country.

"Private sector competitors would focus on profitable areas and services, leaving unprofitable parts to our public post office," warns Deni Lemelin, president of the Canadian Union of Postal Workers (CUPW), in a press release. "With fewer profits, Canada Post would find it increasingly difficult, and eventually impossible, to provide uniform and affordable service, especially in rural and remote parts of the country."

Daniel Maheux, national secretary of the Canadian Postmasters and Assistants Association (CPAA), a group representing post office staff in rural areas, told the Expositor that his organization "is very wary" of the process, as are many municipalities that have made submissions to the panel.

"By and large, the municipalities and unions are working hand in hand on this," he said. "We're concerned the outcome could be negative for rural Canadians, and that this may be used as a tool to further reduce service to rural communities."

The panel has been asked to focus on four main lines of inquiry: how changes in technology, competition and demographics have influenced the postal market; what the emerging needs of customers may be; what can be learned from developments in the postal markets of other countries; and how markets for parcels, advertising mail and letters have evolved internationally.

Reading between such lines, those in the industry sense that a revisiting of Canada Post's monopoly on the handling of addressed letters could become a key part of the exercise, and that auctioning off bits of this service to private firms is a distinct possibility.

Should deregulation occur, Mr. Maheux believes the result would be "office hour reductions or even closures of post offices" in the countryside, as well as mail delivery being "delayed because it's sorted in larger centres, farther away from your community."

The review is necessary, in the view of the Ministry of Transport, Infrastructure and Communications, in order to "make sure Canada Post has the tools and means to continue to fulfill its mandate, which is to provide affordable, universal postal service to Canadians," according to a press release.

In a statement issued on September 2, Lawrence Cannon, head of that department as well as minister responsible for Canada Post, expressed satisfaction that "hundreds of submissions to the Canada Post Strategic Review Advisory Panel have been received by a broad range of individuals and organizations," and reminded Canadians that the "goal of the review is to look at the corporation from a strategic viewpoint and to ensure its long-term viability."

The minister noted that technological changes, notably increased use of email and the Internet, have resulted in a reduction to the volume of material handled by Canada Post, and "this has created new challenges." The corporation, he noted, is expected to operate within a commercial environment and "attain a realistic rate of return on equity."

That said, it remains the crown corporation's mandate-and one that the review panel has been instructed to work within-to "maintain a universal, effective and economically viable postal service," Mr. Cannon pledged. And the government, he further promised, is committed to the principle that "Canada Post will not be privatized and will remain a crown corporation."

Mr. Maheux isn't so sure. "The government has said it won't look at privatization of Canada Post, but the CEO of Canada Post says something quite different," he said.

Privatization, in his assessment, "is one key component of this review." The rural postmasters rep added that "not being able to trust a political leader is nothing new."

While no municipality on Manitoulin has lodged a formal concern through the framework for stakeholder input, many others across Canada have, including such near-neighbours as Spanish, McKellar, Burks Falls, Iroquois Falls, Magnetawan and Armour (part of the Parry Sound district). The latter, in its submission to the review panel, expresses opposition to the deregulation of Canada Post, and further insists that "the government hold public hearings and properly consult with the public."

While the government maintains that the process has been transparent and ample input has been received, critics say just the opposite. "This review is pretty much a secret review," charges CUPW's Mr. Lemelin. "Even though the Conservative government's review could change the very nature of our postal system, the Tories are not holding public hearings or doing much to publicize their examination of Canada Post."

Postal workers are also alarmed that the chair of the review panel, Dr. Robert M. Campbell, earlier penned a book titled The Politics of Postal Transformation, which "recommends that the federal government eliminate the exclusive privilege" of nationally controlled corporations to deliver letters, according to Mr. Lemelin.

Countries that have gone that route, he contends, "now have fewer jobs, less service and higher postal rates for people and small businesses."

Canada Post spokesperson John Kains said it's premature to make any dramatic predictions about the review outcome. "It's crystal balling right now," he told the Expositor. "It's basically part of the ongoing business of Canada Post."

Asked if deregulation of letter delivery was a likely development, Mr. Kains replied, "Who knows? It may be the status quo."

Mr. Kains pointed out that this is not the first time the crown corporation has been subjected to a strategic review of its operations. "We had one in 1985, and again in 1995, and now this one," he said. "Basically the panel will review all the recommendations and report back to the government in the best interests of the service and the public."

As for the allegation that the process has been carried out in secret, Mr. Kains begged to differ. "The ministry put out a national news release," he said. "And there has been public input."

The Canada Post representative wasn't in a position to address the particular options on the review table, noting that "we're the subject matter," but he did point out that, apart from providing reliable service to customers, the corporation also has an obligation to "make a profit and pay a dividend" to the government.

The Green Party, for one, questions that focus. In a release issued in late August, Green leader Elizabeth May pointed out that the Canada Post Corporation Act "requires financial sustainability for the enterprise, not commercial profits like the government wants."

The mandate of the review panel to "consider financial targets for Canada Post" leaves the door open, in her estimation, "to a further shift in focus toward profit and away from public service."

And that, to Ms. May, would be a grave mistake. "Canada Post is not a scheme to make money for federal coffers, but exists to provide a public service," she contends in her release. "Mr. Harper's eagerness to privatize and deregulate services is not in the public interest."

Apart from having a detrimental impact on mail delivery in rural areas, deregulation would lead to a decrease in jobs and "also mean additional delivery vehicles, decreasing the efficiency of letter delivery services while maximizing traffic and pollution," warns Ms. May.

With polls currently predicting a return of the Harper government, possibly even in a majority form, it seems evident that the review of Canada Post will move ahead unabated. But stakeholders expect it will do so regardless of the exact makeup of the next House of Commons.

"The review is going forward no matter what," said Mr. Maheux of the rural postmasters group. "They're supposed to tabulate findings by the end of the year or early in the new year."

His hope is that the concerns expressed by his organization, as well as dozens of municipalities across the country that depend on rural mail delivery, will be taken seriously by whichever regime happens to be in place by that time.

"In our submission, we're saying that we absolutely want to retain rural service in its current state," he said. "Not only that, we want to grow the rural service. We want the corporation to be open-minded and consider new ideas that might bring more traffic and revenue into our post offices, rather than dismantle the distribution network that's already there and works fine."

Early deadline and Thurs. paper next week

As usual, the Expositor office will be closed on Monday, October 13, the Thanksgiving holiday, and the deadline for classified ads, social correspondence, letters to the editor and display advertising is Noon this Friday, October 10.

Next week's paper, however, will not be published and sent to subscribers and news dealers until Thursday, October 16. The Expositor office is making this unusual change in order to deliver the results and analysis of next Tuesday's federal general election to Manitoulin readers in as timely a way as possible.

Finally, the staff at the Expositor would like to wish our family of readers a pleasant and relaxing Thanksgiving weekend.

EDITORIAL

Economic scare should not eclipse ecological concerns

A few weeks ago, this newspaper noted in this space that if environmental issues weren't the prevailing theme of next week's federal general election, it would likely be the last election when they weren't.

Market turmoil in the US has overlapped onto Canada's electoral landscape and has hijacked our own political discourse. Ironically, the day of our national party leaders' first debate last Thursday, the Toronto Stock Exchange plunged an astounding 800 points.

Voters, suddenly more nervous about all aspects of our country's economy (manufacturing jobs, investment security, retirement income) are understandably scrutinizing each party and its leader about their ability to manage in difficult times and to ensure maximum prosperity for citizens in the process.

Politicians in this-and likely every other-country like to remind voters that the system is basically sound.

Former Liberal prime minister Paul Martin said this about four years ago and Conservative leader Stephen Harper reiterated it last week, and doubtless political leaders of every stripe have been reassuring Canadian citizens in this way since Confederation in 1867.

The point is, it's true: the Toronto Stock Exchange (TSE) rebounded the next day, regaining about half of the previous day's loss.

And, of course, those who trade at the TSE, and so create headlines when there is a substantial change one way or the other, are themselves enormously influenced by the market forces in the United States and Europe where banks and insurance companies and other financial institutions have had to be bailed out, propped up and generally rescued by any other number of construction and marine analogies.

But not in Canada. Our banks, insurance companies and other institutions are, as Mr. Martin, Mr. Harper and countless others have pointed out, basically sound and the Bank of Canada is doing its best to make certain there is an ample pool of cash available for borrowing needs at every level.

What is unfortunate about last week's fiscal ruckus, coming as it did so close to election day next Tuesday, is that it may have rendered this election to be the last one where environmental issues do not dominate the national debate.

It is, however, not too late for individual voters to take the measure of the parties' positions on the environment and how they would encourage us as individual Canadians to roll back the tide of global warming fuelled by the largely unchecked production and emission of greenhouse gasses.

For the voters of Algoma-Manitoulin-Kapuskasing, the most practical thing is to compare the policies of the Liberals and the NDP for, based on the past two federal elections, it is by a substantial margin the Liberals and the NDP who will battle for this riding and it is the candidate representing one of these two parties who will represent this riding in the next parliament after October 14.

Liberal leader Stéphane Dion has staked much of his party's immediate future on what he has named a Green Shift and this shift will be largely driven by a carbon tax.

Elections tend not to be won by promising a tax of any kind; we need to look back no further than former Tory prime minister Joe Clark who led a minority government to power in 1980 only to lose a confidence motion later that same year that led to the re-election of the Liberals under Pierre Trudeau. That last vote of confidence that sent Mr. Clark's minority Tories back to the polls was about a modest increase in gasoline fuel taxes at the pumps.

Another Conservative, former prime minister Brian Mulroney, enjoyed back-to-back majority governments from 1984 to 1993. During his second mandate, Mr. Mulroney's Conservatives enacted the "much hated" (a phrase that seemed to introduce this particular tax in almost every public forum for about five years) Goods and Services Tax (GST), which, although the Harper government rolled it back to 5 percent from its original 7 percent, has put a great deal of cash in the federal treasury that over the past 15 years and has helped enormously to pay down the national deficit and to balance successive budgets.

But the GST, simply because it was a tax of any kind, was made much of by the Chrétien Liberals and so Mr. Mulroney's Progressive Conservatives were denied the three-peat he had dreamed of. (And, for the record, the succeeding Liberal government did nothing about the GST except continue to collect it and use it to make Canada a prosperous country.)

So here we have Liberal leader Stéphane Dion proposing a carbon tax and so setting he and his party up for any amount of abuse, including a misleading Conservative television commercial that declares that the carbon tax will be "a tax on everything!"

It won't be, of course, and the Liberals' plan is to offer Canadian taxpayers income tax breaks that would equal the burden of the carbon tax that would be levied on polluters: $10 per metric tonne of greenhouse gas emissions on both industrial and domestic use. For citizens, who would be carbon-taxed on other domestic contributions to the greenhouse gas problem, there would be an offsetting income tax deduction equal to the carbon tax they've paid, so the equation would be revenue-neutral for the average taxpayer.

In fact, the Liberal platform states that the auditor-general would be given the authority to ensure citizens would pay no more taxes as a result of the new system.

For polluting industries, on the other hand, it would be a self-fulfilling prophecy: change to more efficient, less polluting technologies and see your taxes go down. In fact, the Liberals' plan is a graduated one with the $10-per-metric-tonne carbon tax rising by $10 per year for four years to a maximum of $40 per metric tonne at that point. The four-year phase-in period allows a useful window for industries, and homeowners too, to investigate and implement less polluting means of doing business, heating homes and looking at alternative modes of transportation that will keep their carbon taxes closer to the $10 per metric tonne level then to the $40 limit.

Gasoline and other motor fuels, by the way, will be exempt from carbon taxes in the Liberals' plan because the existing 42 percent federal excise tax on automotive gasoline will be deemed to be the carbon tax and the Liberals' platform guarantees this for at least four years. And the Liberals are also offering rural taxpayers (like the citizens of the Algoma-Manitoulin-Kapuskasing riding) an annual "green rural credit" of $150 to offset additional transportation and home-heating costs that are a reality in areas like our own.

Finally, the Liberals have targeted a reduction of greenhouse gas emissions of 20 percent less than those that existed in 1990 and they feel this can be achieved by 2020 using their Green Shift plan.

The New Democratic Party's green plan, on the other hand, targets only industrial polluters and allows these businesses more leeway than the Liberals' plan, for the NDP's carbon taxing would only cut in over and above a certain level of polluting.

The NDP's proposal also includes a cap-and-trade policy. This means that every business would be assigned a cap or limit on the amount of pollution/greenhouse gas it could spill into the atmosphere during a stated period (likely per year).

Each polluter in Canada, in the NDP's program, would be given a certain number of carbon credits, giving every individual business the right to emit a certain amount of carbon through their building/manufacturing/transportation businesses. In simplest terms, the more smoke going up and out a particular business's smokestack, the quicker they would be using up those carbon credits.

But businesses that used less than their alloted carbon credits would be allowed to sell (that's the "trade" part of cap-and-trade) those credits to other polluters which had not managed so well and needed more credits than they'd been allotted to get through the year and remain viable.

If a business does exceed its carbon (greenhouse gas) emission limits and does not purchase offsetting credits from another greener businesses that would have had credits to spare, the NDP proposes a stiff fine.

The New Democrats, if elected to govern, would immediately halt all developments in Alberta's oil sands (the "dirty oil" the Americans refer to), would invest $750 million to train workers in "green collar" jobs and, further, would invest an annual $1 billion to expand and upgrade public transportation and to retrofit existing public transport to enhance its energy efficiency.

With its cap-and-trade proposal, the NDP feels it can reduce current greenhouse gas emissions by 80 percent of today's benchmark by 2050.

So there we have it: two quite different approaches to the same end by the two parties who are the only realistic contenders to the Algoma-Manitoulin-Kapuskasing seat in the House of Commons.

In balance, we hold that the Liberal plan is the better of the two on a number of counts.

First, it involves us all, citizens and businesses alike, in solving the problem.

For citizens, an analogy might be made to giving a kitten "free to a good home" but with the proviso and clear understanding that the occupants of that good home will take the pet the veterinarian for his/her shots and to be spayed/neutered. If there is a proviso for a buy-in to the wellbeing of the kitten, there is every likelihood that it will be well looked after in all aspects of its life.

Similarly, as the Liberals' platform has it, we're all-citizen householders and businesses alike-expected to share in the pain of turning around the threat of climate change, there is far more likelihood that it will happen, and that, at least in Canada, our particular target can be reached even earlier than projected.

Further, the four-year phasing in of the full carbon tax does allow us to do something about the problem in which-as citizens not only of this country but of this planet-we all share.

The NDP's system targets only business polluters, so that ignores the real potential of the universal buy-in that makes the Liberal scheme so attractive.

The Liberals' many-hands-make-light-work approach to the greenhouse gas problem is the only one of these that will quickly educate all Canadians about our responsibility to fix a problem so that, seven generations hence, our great-great-great-greats can breathe the air and go for a swim in the North Channel.

The Liberal proposal, for businesses, comes with an expectation that they will improve their emissions. Either that or pay big dollars in carbon taxes.

The NDP's proposal for businesses, once again, is not a universal one for it puts the onus on polluters of a certain size.

Well, once again, we all pollute so why not encourage us, through the carbon tax system, to reduce our emissions and thus reduce our taxes? That's every business. And that shared responsibility will mean less pollution in Canada, which is surely the end game of the whole endeavour.

The NDP's cap-and-trade proposal not only sounds complicated, it will be complicated, and it surely defeats the notion of fixing things for future generations; wealthy businesses can simply buy their way through their pollution problem by taking advantage of carbon credits made available by more efficient businesses that are doing their best to be a part of the solution and not of the problem.

Global warming is a reality. Our own seasonal shifts in temperatures reflect this, together with the fact that for the first time ever, the region of which Manitoulin Island is a part has had smog alerts during the summers each of the past five years.

Even if environmental concerns have been displaced as the main national issue by recent market flutters, that does not render them any less important to us and, especially, to those who will succeed us.

And for the two main parties in contention in Algoma-Manitoulin-Kapusaking, the Liberals have a far more insightful, universal and practical program to address climate change.

Letters to the Editor

Ramshackle riding is too large to meet needs of northerners

What happened to former riding that served us well?

To the Expositor:

Like millions of Canadians in the approaching federal election, I am likely going to vote for the Conservative Party of Canada this time around. I've watched the Harper government for the past three years or so, and based on their track record overall, I am more or less satisfied that they are leading Canada in the right direction.

Why is it then that I think my vote will be wasted in the area where I live?

The reason is because of this new political contraption called the Algoma-Manitoulin-Kapuskasing riding that we are cursed with now. This ramshackle new riding, cobbled together by Elections Canada, will condemn the Conservatives to third-party status forever up in our part of Ontario.

Whatever happened to the old federal riding of Algoma-Manitoulin that served us well for so many years? True, the Liberals usually won, but at least we had some good horse races in a lot of these elections.

This redrawing of the boundary lines for our riding brings to mind a word that was sometimes used in politics over in Ireland when the party in power fiddled with electoral boundaries to maintain their grip on power. I think they called it "gerrymandering."

The Algoma-Manitoulin-Kapuskasing riding was born in the last years of the Jean Chretien/Paul Martin era. I find it hard to believe that this change in the boundary lines was accidental. Probably the worst kept secret in Canadian politics is how the federal bureaucracy in Ottawa was hijacked by those of the Liberal persuasion over the past 30 or 40 years. Are we supposed to believe that Elections Canada is somehow different from the other departments of the federal government in Ottawa? I doubt it.

Whoever heard of a political riding so big that it stretches from Manitoulin Island in the south end, all the way up to Kapuskasing in the north, and half-way to Thunder Bay in the west end? Have a look at it on the map. This riding probably has more square miles in it than some European countries the size of France. It's ridiculous when you think about it.

It's not just the size of the riding that makes it so unworkable. The boundaries take in so many different towns, and so many different areas with people coming from such different backgrounds, that there can never be any sense of "togetherness."

For example, what does an area like Manitoulin Island, that was historically settled by those of the Anglo-Saxon variety, have in common with some place up north like Kapuskasing, where it is an overwhelming majority of francophone voters? Again, I am a little bit suspicious about the new boundary lines, especially given the historical tendency of people from a francophone background to vote overwhelmingly for the Liberal Party.

Thank goodness the NDP have been able to give the Liberals a good run for their money in the last couple of elections. But this gives small comfort to the people of Manintoulin who have very little in common with the old mill towns and mining towns of the far North, where the politics of the trade  union hall so often prevailed.

I wonder if there is someone out there from Elections Canada who could answer my question as to how our new Algoma-Manitoulin-Kapuskasing riding came into being? I probably shouldn't hold my breath waiting.

Peter Flanagan

Gore Bay

Writer accuses parties of backing corrupt capitalist system

St. Denis wrong to evoke Suzuki as political ally

To the Expositor:

Manitoulin Expositor's Chris Kivinen-Newman's October 1 report of the Manitoulin Secondary School all-candidates meeting on September 24 was an opportunity to report a giant's leading.

How do the representatives of the various factions of the capitalist party-Conservatives, Liberals, NDP and Green Party-justify support of our capitalist unemployment, kill the unemployed, unemployment and elimination of the planet earth system?

Liberal capitalist Brent St. Denis and former NDP supporter David Suzuki is upset with Jack Layton for not supporting the Liberal anti-carbon plan.

If Mr. St. Denis is implying Mr. Suzuki was just another capitalist NDP turned backwards to being a Liberal capitalist, modern history is full of reactionary Bob Raes.

Mr. St. Denis picked a particularly bad example as, of all the people that should be a devout ban-the-bomber, is Japanese Suzuki. Canada's ban-the-bomb history does not include his name.

Although the University of Toronto had 16,000 in attendance in 1960, it had but 11 students (demonstrating against any further USA atomic wars, for example, the bombing of Hiroshima on August 6, 1945). I had the honour of being one of the 11. I had the honour of being jailed by my own cousin, Chief Justice of Ontario James Chalmers McRuer, for speaking against the bomb.

When I transport Little Current to M'Chigeeng students past the Giant's Monument I ask them if their teachers have told them of Gulliver's Travels and Alice in Wonderland, two essential books and such giants as Bethune, Morgentaler, the Canadian Seaman's Union, etc., and of tamarack trees, only to recognize replies.

Douglas Campbell

Honora Bay

Harvest Bounty dinner a professional, delicious feast

Nuances of 100-mile diet alive and well on Manitoulin

To the Expositor:

It's an amazing thing, really, this Manitoulin Island and the inhabitants who keep it afloat. There I was again, serving (or being volunteered to serve by my energetic wife) at the Harvest Bounty banquet in Little Current on Sunday, September 27.

One reads and hears about the 100-mile diet and how more of us should adhere to it to save our environment and in the process support our local economy-and there it was once again, just like last year happening right in front of me: a five-course banquet served to 160 Manitouliners who came out to support the Manitoulin Community Food Network. The entire repast was prepared from products nurtured and organically grown on this largest freshwater island in the world. From bread made by Maja with locally grown and milled wheat, to the lettuce and vegetables in the salad, to the squash in the soup made by the Anchor Inn folks, to the garlic and potatoes in the mashed potatoes, and all the vegetables in the ratatouille made by chef Mathew, to the 'simply best' roast beef, raised and prepared by Max, topped off with, of course, pumpkin pie from pumpkins grown on Manitoulin, everything was grown on Manitoulin-totally awesome.

And of course, all these Manitoulin edibles were flawlessly served by one of the finest group of servers I have been able to perform with. Ten of the Little Current Curling Club's finest-dressed in matching white tops and black bottoms-looked so very professional and served all courses the same. Nary a drop of anything where it should not have been (and Gord drying cutlery was a sight to see). The dining and digestion abetted by the soothing tones of dinner music from Maurice on his keyboard followed by the rollicking tunes of John, Jamie and Peter. The entire evening was a 100-percent Manitoulin effort.

Kudos to all the farmers and gardeners who grew this fresh local food and to anyone who wants to try it. It's right here in front of you-at your local farmers' market or just down the road from you, grown on Manitoulin. Amazing. The 100-mile diet is alive and well right here on the grand Manitoulin.

John Diebolt

Tehkummah