Tuesday, October 31, 2006

Montague 24 : The 2nd All Candidates Part 2 : Fanning The Flames

So, in the previous post I covered the meeting last night as factually as possible from the notes I took. Now I'm going to throw my observations and opinions out there, and I do so not from any partisan motivation at this point but out of real fear for the future of Montague.

Right from the top of last night's meeting the atmosphere was very different from the first meeting. There were a few more people present, I think, although many of the same faces were there. But there was much more tension in the room even before the event began.

Reeve Doyle's approach was confrontational and defensive from the beginning of his opening statement. He looked worried this time out. At the first meeting he was almost bored, but last night the impression was of a man realising his grip on power could be beginning to slip.

Things started out reasonably enough with the opening statements and even the first questions. Tensions didn't really begin to rise until a firefighter took the microphone and in what was clearly a personally motivated move asked Hal MacGregor to identify the causes of division within the township. There was some banter back and forth at this point, but even here it was really a predictable fencing match between the two. Obviously personal but not venomous

The question that started the downward spiral for me was the question of the $25 donation to the seniors club. That Reeve Doyle could actually stand there and defend the decision not to make this donation, basically because his precious feathers had been ruffled by some individuals in the seniors club, was beyond me. Peter Kavanagh used the word 'unworthy'. I don't have to be so polite; I'll call that decision what it was and is: petty, vindictive, and contemptible. It was nicely followed up by Vince Carroll's innuendo that the seniors had faked vandalism of their heat pump. Great work there. Good to know council's really got their heads screwed on.

The question to Dianne Coates about her alleged 'volatility' was predictable, but was asked and answered civilly. Throughout the evening, Dianne's cool, articulate handling of some inappropriate comments was a living answer to all of the questions of this nature that she's been asked. She was accused of being disrespectful to Doyle and Schoular; in fact this didn't happen, but plenty of disrespect was thrown her way.

Then, the lawsuit can of worms was opened good and proper. Again, Doyle was asked what he'd learned. Last time he'd been 'blindsided' by the Charter. This time it 'interfered'. Yes, your Reeve thinks the Charter of Rights and Freedoms is an 'interference' in the way he does his job. He'd rather we didn't have such a thing, because it really does make running Montague Gary's way an awful lot harder. All those inconvenient things like people asking questions, speaking their mind, talking about him. How dare we. To me, this answer, the choice of the word 'interfere' is extremely revealing about Mr. Doyle's attitude.

It got better. Nobody wanted a lawsuit, said Doyle. It was a last resort. How does this square with the threat of 'immediate legal action' that was made on January 13, 2005 in writing by Mr. Doyle? Mr. Doyle apparently goes from zero to last resort in three weeks. Quick work, sure, but not necessarily mature, smart, or appropriate in an elected official. Evidence has since been provided to me that Mr. Doyle's issuing of threatening letters is a long term pattern of behaviour in matters other than the Don Page suit.

David Schoular, not to be outdone, followed up with an outright lie. The Charter, he said, was not an issue until the day of the court hearing. Uh huh... So those CCLA lawyers you refused to hear, what did you think they'd come to talk about? Also, the township must have been served with the pre-trial motion to dismiss well ahead of the actual court date. So David Schoular lied, on record.

Then we hit the low point of the evening when a grinning individual took the microphone and asked John McTavish about his alleged bankruptcy. The question was out of order. The motivation was purely personal animosity; it was visible and palpable. Pure vindictiveness at work. Almost worse was the sight of this individual returning to his place with a series of handshakes and high-fives from friends. Good one guys. Be proud of yourselves. It takes real heroism to crow over anothers personal misfortune.

The question to David Schoular about his dismissal was ruled out of order, although in fact it is highly relevant, because it concerns a conflict of interest related directly to his serving in elected office. So, since no question is out of order here, here's a reminder of the answer.

I've got a free piece of career advice for David; join the McGuinty Liberals. I think you'd make an excellent McGuinty MPP. You'd fit right in.

Last night, although the MRA folks haven't behaved anywhere near perfectly, it was my genuine sense that they are ready to move on and put things behind them. It was very interesting to watch the group at the back of the room all evening. Obviously they have their preferred slate of candidates. No secret there. But what I noticed was that even when one of their own talked about moving on, about leaving the division of the lawsuit behind, not one of them applauded. They stood stony faced. Didn't look too much like any of them actually want to move on. They struck macho poses and grinned that grin that teenage boys get when they're acting tough. To me, they looked like nothing more than a group of schoolyard bullies.

So here's the deal as far as I see it. Yes, some nasty things were said about the fire department. Yes, some were untrue and possibly defamatory. But, they had their day in court and the matter was resolved - and if not, then individuals should go ahead and sue Mr. Page themselves. They have every right. But they no longer have the right to paralyse the township by pursuing the feud or their personal vendettas against John McTavish, Dianne Coates, or anyone else, and neither do their supporters.

Neither do the MRA have the right to keep up with this. But life being what it is, sometimes one person or one group have to step up and make the first move. Sometimes you have to swallow a little pride. It makes you a better person and a stronger person. Last night showed the MRA group is ready to step up and move on. Will Doyle, council and the Fire Department? Vince Carroll tried; pity his colleagues couldn't join him.

It seems Mr. Doyle isn't prepared to listen to anyone, or to acknowledge any weakness or fault in his handling of anything. He uses secrecy and threats on a regular basis. Without openness and a willingness to listen, compromise, forgive and forget, we won't be getting anywhere. And last night I became convinced that we need a new council if that's ever to happen in Montague.

It's no longer about who's right and who's wrong. It's about who will and won't move on.

Montague 23 : The Second All Candidates

So, here's what we'll do, with thanks to you-know-who-you-are for the suggestion. Two posts. Here's the factual account of last night's meeting. In a later post, my personal opinions and comment. Hopefully keeping these entirely seperate will minimize the risk of misunderstanding and allow everyone to share their point of view peacefully.

The meeting followed a similar format to the first.

Opening Statements

Reeve Doyle gave a robust defence of his record, focusing primarily on the financial stability of the township. He also stressed the importance of this election as council will serve for four years instead of three. He gave a detailed breakdown of the reserves held by the township. He described the budget process, and the scrutiny given to each of the over 600 line items in the township budget. He stated that in his view the township is not divided.

John McTavish promised an open, responsible and respectful council. He promised that any inquiry would receive a response within three business days. He promised to review all contracts and agreements currently in force. In-camera sessions of council would be minimized if he is elected, and reports on their outcome would be made available. He would immediately form a recreation committee and a roads committee. He would instigate audio / video recording of council meetings, and install a PA system in the Council chambers. He would restore an open question session at council meetings.

Kenneth Hunter reprised his opening address from the first all candidates meeting.

Peter Kavanagh introduced himself as the 'new kid on the block' but assured the audience that Montague was now his home and that he was as committed as anyone else to the township. He stated that he was hearing from people that they want change. Denial of the divide in the township is not going to help; the township must move forward. To do that requires leadership and this is what he has to offer. Currently, he said, we are not seeing leadership from the current council, especially in dealings with other levels of government. He also promised fewer in-camera sessions of council, open questions and open government. He promised a communications plan for the Fire Department, to better link them to the community. He also promised within 12 months to develop a long-term, strategic plan for the development of the township.

David Schoular said he has enjoyed his three years as Deputy Reeve and feels that he has represented the township well. He highlighted the accomplishments of the term: the roads needs study, the Master Fire Plan, development charges, the property standards bylaw and minimal tax increases. If re-elected, he promises leadership and dedication.

Mark Baker described living in the township for over thirty years, and hearing the same issues raised over and over again throughout that time: taxes and basic services. Council is spending money on consultants, but it is the residents voices that need to be heard. He spoke of development being urgent and the need to be more aggressive in defending the Rideau Regional Centre. He will not take the commitment lightly if elected and looks forward to serving on council.

Bonnie Burson reiterated her business background and strengths and stated that she could bring her business skills to bear on council as well as honesty and integrity.

Vince Carroll said that the township was financially secure, that he wanted to push for more recreational facilities and more development, and sat down again.

Dianne Coates described her 25 years of experience in the federal government. She promises fairness, openness and accountability if elected. She wants to restore balance to council. She would push for prudent spending decisions, with a focus on infrastructure. She would work hard to attract industry to Montague and to make it a 'real' community once again.

Bill Dobson said that the community needs to unite in order to move forward. He would replace arrogance with respect, and put the past behind us. The future of Rideau Regional would be a top priority for him. He highlighted the experience of the Montfort Hospital, slated for closure but now a major centre of excellence, thanks to the robust campaign residents mounted in its defence. He would like to see a similar campaign for the Rideau Regional. He would encourage small business in Montague and look for development opportunities at the airport.

Bill Eckersley gave the same opening address as at the first all candidates night.

Hal MacGregor said that the overwhelming message was that the township wants change. His priorities are: lower taxes, cleaning up waste at all levels, listening to residents concerns and making sure that bylaws reflect the rural character of Montague. He would record all council votes. He would like to see parks and playgrounds created to reinforce pride in subdivisions and create neighborhoods in the township. He feels that residents are fed up with the current council.

Questions

To David Schoular: Why did you oppose the spending of $120 for a laptop for the OPP, but award yourself a 70% pay increase? Mr. Schoular explained that the laptop issue had been a point of principle; that the OPP already receives over $350,000 for policing services and that if they needed a laptop it should have been budgeted for in the agreement with Montague. On the issue of the raise he explained that the township auditor had carried out a comparison study and recommended a level of compensation to bring Montague up to the Lanark county average.

To John McTavish: Describe the divide in the township. John spoke of social functions that are now attended by one of two solitudes; the firefighters don't come to the seniors functions and vice-versa. The township is divided into groups that never overlap.

To Hal McGregor: What caused the divide in the township? Hal spoke of the confrontational attitude of the current council and suggested the question be directed to the incumbents as to why they don't attend seniors functions any more.

To Gary Doyle: Why did you refuse a $25 donation for the seniors cookbook. Doyle commented that he had been an original member of the Forget-Me-Nots, and he said our seniors need support. However, he said, the seniors club has become politicized. Council does not feel welcome. The seniors need an attitude adjustment to remove the political overtones. The decision not to give the $25 was a whole council decision, not his personally. Peter Kavanagh said that although there might be politics involved in the seniors club, it was unworthy of council to allow personal animosities to deprive all of the seniors of support. He also highlighted that council did the same thing when they refused to help with the $500 insurance deductible when the heat pump at the hall was vandalised. Vince Carroll suggested that the 'vandalism' of the heat pump had been fabricated.

To Dianne Coates: You were 'curt' when answering a question at the last meeting. Will this be your attitude to all questions, or will you only answer questions you want to answer? Dianne gave essentially the same answer as at the previous meeting, explained that she had only spoken at council once, and that she had left after David Schoular had told her to leave the township if she didn't like the way it was run. She said that she had been passionate, as well she might as the court case was a landmark Canadian decision upholding the rights of all.

To all Reeve / Deputy Candidates: What are your views on the CRF? None of the candidates knew what CRF was.

To the current Reeve / Deputy: During the last council term, one councillor was 'forced out' and the treasurer and deputy had been dismissed. What was going on? David Schoular referred the question to the councillor who had resigned.

To Gary Doyle: What did you learn from the lawsuit experience? Doyle said that he'd learned that the council should have taken a different tack. The Charter of Rights and Freedoms 'interfered' with council's suit. He reiterated that nobody had wanted the lawsuit. He described council's role in the investigation and pointed out that the issues were to be resolved by the police and Fire Marshall, and that council should not and could not have been involved in the investigation or interviewed witnesses.

Peter Kavanagh spoke to the firefighters and identified the launching of the lawsuit as the real start of their problems - it was the lawsuit that catapulted them into the public eye and the national and local media. He said that with real leadership the matter could have easily been resolved inside the township and that even if the complaints had continued they would eventually have been starved. He also pointed out that the first threat of legal action from Gary Doyle was made just three weeks after the fire, on January 13, 2005.

David Schoular denied that council had 'jumped in' to the lawsuit and pointed out that they had consulted with all parties before suing. He said that the Charter had not even appeared as an issue until the court date.

To all Candidates: What would they do about preserving the quality of water in the Rideau system? Hal spoke of Smiths Falls occasionally dumping sewage and that the RVCA didn't take any action. Bill Eckersley pointed out that we all share responsibility for water quality, as individual residents.

To Peter Kavanagh: You travel a lot; how would you keep up with your commitment to council. If using telecommunications, who will pay? Peter explained that he would be minimizing travel and had already prepared his consulting business for this contigency. He will pay any costs personally.

To Bill Dobson: Name a positive initiative of the MRA. Bill named the first all-candidates meeting, the Rosedale road cleanup and a litany of social events.

To Incumbents: What is the Master Fire Plan and how did it come about? Reeve Doyle explained that the plan is a province wide initiative of the Fire Marshall's office, that it sets out standards and plans for fire response in the township and that Montague is one of the first in the province to complete the process.

To John McTavish: How can you stand for election when filing for bankruptcy? The moderator ruled this question out of order, but John answered anyway, that his business was in bankruptcy, but that he personally was not.

To All Candidates: The leader of the CUPE local at Rideau Regional asked why they were all talking about RRC in the past tense, and what they were prepared to do to fight for the Centre. Peter Kavanagh said that there was inertia in the current council's response and that only the union was actually doing anything at present. Council is allowing the province to set the agenda. He worries that the levels of government will continue finger pointing while the Centre gradually slides its way to closure. Bill Dobson again spoke of the Montfort example and said that he had discussed the issue with Mayor Staples. There is the chance that a change in provincial government in 2007 could bring a reprieve. Gary Doyle said that the province had agreed to consult the township and that is all we can ask for.

To Dianne Coates: Will you be able to work with the current Reeve if elected? Diane said that as a professional of 25 years standing she can work with anyone.

To David Schoular: Why were you dismissed from your government job? Ruled out of order by the moderator.

To Reeve Doyle: How did cancelling the open question session at council help? Gary said that the question session was being misused by people with 'agendas'. David Schoular claimed that people are still free to speak at council. Hal MacGregor stated this was untrue, and that he had been present at meetings where council refused to hear any questions.

To members of the MRA: Why have you not apologised to the Fire Department? Dianne Coates described how her first home had burned down and how she had ended up married to one of the founding members of the Montague Fire Department. Bill Dobson stated again, that the issue was with council and if council had been willing to talk there need have been no lawsuit.

To Dianne Coates: Clarify your statement on the outcome of the lawsuit. Dianne responded that her statement was that council had been incorrect in bringing the suit and that this was the judge's ruling. Vince Carroll said he had not come to talk about a lawsuit and we should move on. Bonnie Burson echoed that.

In Closing

Gary Doyle said that financial stability must come before all else.

Kenneth Hunter said that there is something in Montague for everyone.

Peter Kavanagh said we need to increase the tax base to achieve things like the required road improvements and that his strategic plan was required to make this happen.

David Schoular said that the township was strong, but bogged down in issues.

Mark Baker said that the township requires leadership.

Bonnie Burson said that she was here because she believes in Montague.

Vince Carroll expressed disappointment that we had not discussed taxes, garbage collection, recreation, roads, or any 'real' issues. What can voters hope to have learned from the evening?

Dianne Coates thanked all for their attendance and involvement.

Bill Dobson said he would look for a project or event to help the township come together and work for a common goal again.

Bill Eckersley read the back of his flyer.

Hal MacGregor said that everyone agrees that we need to move on, and a change in council is required for that to happen.

Montague 22 : Hal MacGregor Writes

I read with dismay your remark about eating Shawn Carmichael's eggs, but that you would not break the law to protect him.

I felt two separate emotions when I read your remark: One of disbelief that you were implying Shawn had broken a law, and secondly that you were suggesting I was wrong in defending him, (since my campaign brochure stated I had done so, and I am proud of it).

If you knew Shawn Carmichael as I know him, you would never have made such an absurd statement.

Please let me enlighten you as to the legal aspects of his situation. In Canada, Federal laws have supremacy over any provincial laws - or Municipal bylaws.Article 2 in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, (which is the paramount law in Canada) states: Every Canadian has the right of association.

By definition, that includes the right of disassociation. In other words, every Canadian has the right not to be forced to belong to an association (or guild, or union, or any identifiable organized group). That right is further upheld in several Federal statutes governing labour unions, etc.
I contend that the Province of Ontario statute forcing all egg producers in Ontario with more than 99 chickens, to join the provincial egg marketing board is unconstitutional, and will be struck down if it is ever brought before a competent Canadian court.

No OLA members were charged with anything as a result of our defence of Shawn on that day, quite the contrary.

We later demonstrated at the Prescott Police station, and tried to go through normal lawful channels to lay charges against the Police for their cruel and inhumane suffocation of 800 chickens when they were packed too tightly. I, personally, later testified before an OPP Constable in Rideau Lakes as part of that effort to bring the guilty ones to justice. Of course, nothing came of it in the end.

Most area newpapers reported that event with objectivity, the one exception was the Ottawa Citizen, whose reporter on the scene talked only to policemen at the time. His original report was later corrected on page 15 or somewhere insignificant.

You may find it interesting that, at Shanly, calls were made to the OSPCA as the cruelty was happening, and they declined to become involved. So much for their objectivity and their mandate to prevent cruelty to animals.

You might also find it interesting, that at Shanly, when I was discussing the situation with some OPP friends, they advised me they were not happy with what they were being forced to do.
Also, as for you not being willing to "break the law" in defence of Shawn Carmichael, one must consider that standing on one's principles in the face of a perceived injustice is the only thing standing between an Orwellian nightmare and the democracy, with all its freedoms, we so cherish today in many parts of the world.

George Washington committed treason (which was a hanging offence) when he led a revolution against King George III, but he prevailed and became the greatest hero of the United States of America. His call for "No Taxation without Representation" will go down in history as one of the great milestones of democratic movements.

Here in Canada, we were taught as children that we owe our Canadian freedom of the Press to one man, Joseph Howe. Howe was the editor of a Halifax newspaper, and he wrote a column critical of some Nova Scotia government leaders of the day.

Although he was technically guilty of breaking a (bad) law that forbade such a thing, he argued his own case before a jury of his peers, and he successfully convinced them of his right to do so. He was found innocent and the law was struck down. Now, all Canadians enjoy the right to criticize our governments, thanks to one man who had the courage of his convictions. By the way, Howe went on to become Premier of Nova Scotia, and eventually joined a Federal cabinet in a government of "National Unity".

Thank God for such men.

As a footnote, a prophetic entry was found in a German concentration camp during the closing days of the Second World War. It had been written by one of the many victims of Nazi tyranny. Its author was among those "undesirables" executed and thrown into a common grave. What was most startling about the author was that he had been a submarine Commander in the German Navy during the First World War.

What was so remarkable about the scribbled note, was its stark message of the general compliance on behalf of the mass of German people, when faced with an intolerant authority. It read:

First, they came for the Jews, and nobody objected.
Then, they came for the Gypsies, and nobody objected.
Then, they came for the Gays, and nobody objected.
Then, they came for me.

Hal MacGregor/Candidate for Councillor

Montague 21 : Whither The Blog

This is a tough post to begin and to write. Up until last night's all candidates meeting, I'd only read about certain things in the media. Last night was my first chance to observe those things up close and personal and it's left me with very mixed feelings.

On the one hand, having started this whole blogging process, I would like to continue to set down what I saw and heard and my reaction to it. On the other, given some of what was on display last night and given the well documented happenings of the last few years in the Township, I have to admit to a certain apprehension for my personal safety and that of my family, should I actually write what's in my mind to write. I have a young family. I don't want to put them in a situation where they face unnecessary risks. I didn't sleep too well last night for thinking about these issues.

I'm not a journalist. For one thing, I've never slept with a senior member of the Liberal party. But I started blogging because there's a lot I wanted to say. I've worked hard at this so far and I've put a lot of sweat, heart and soul into it. Having started, I have found a voice and thus far I've been able to be entirely true to myself. With one exception, which I corrected within hours, I've never posted anything I wasn't entirely comfortable with. I've never compromised my values or beliefs. What I've written is who I am.

Some of what I saw last night disturbed me greatly. I'm still not sure whether to put my thoughts out there or not. I need to weigh being true to myself with being smart about any potential risks to myself and my family.

So, there will be an account of the evening at some point, when I've decided what to do. Until then, I'll post the first guest post from one of the candidates.

Monday, October 30, 2006

Montague 20 : Speechless For Now

Just got back from the second all-candidates evening. Now, in England, it's traditional to have fireworks on the 5th of November. Here in Montague, apparently, we like to do this on the 30th of October.

It's late, I'm tired and I'm enjoying a Bushmills Single Malt Irish Whiskey. I'll cover the meeting in a post tomorrow. Anyone else who was there, feel free to add a comment to this post.

Sunday, October 29, 2006

Montague 19 : The Winds Of Change?

Looking at the opinion poll results as they stand tonight, it looks as though the winds of change are blowing through the township, at least for the readers of this blog. Now, the sample is very small (around 20ish) and the readers of this blog are perhaps overwhelmingly members of the MRA - or are you? Still, the incumbent councillors are trailing quite a way behind the challengers and even Reeve Doyle is struggling.

Make it more accurate; encourage your friends and neighbours to come along and click a few buttons, even if they don't read the whole blog.

One very interesting thing is that the race for Deputy Reeve is very one-sided; this says to me (so far) that Peter Kavanagh has the respect and confidence of people on both sides of the lawsuit issue. I think this can only be good for the township. Based on the one very short meeting I've had with Mr. Kavanagh, I think he's one person who really can bring everyone together and I think he will be a leader as we start putting old divisions behind the township and moving forward.

Political Paralysis

I haven't blogged much on the federal political scene in a while; partly out of fear at being picked up by CTV again, but mostly because what I have written in the last couple of weeks is pretty much a fair assessment of what Parliament has usefully achieved in the same timeframe, i.e. nothing.

I find it ironic that the Liberal Party allowed the government's top priorities to pass the House so easily earlier in the year - those things that they bitterly opposed, like the $1,200 childcare allowance, the GST cut, and so on. Then, when the government is working on things that should be a no-brainer, like increasing accountability and fixing a broken justice system, the Liberals delay, carp, hack and gut the legislation. Not only that, but they spend their entire time in the spotlight of Question Period whinging about alleged dog remarks.

Grow up, Mr. Graham and your crowd. You may not like Mr. Harper and you may have different views on where you want to take things. But you're elected to serve the people, just the same. And the people, whatever their political stripe, want you to take care of the nation's business, not go around scooping dog poop.

It's The Parents Who Need Their Heads Examined

Flipping through the very thin pages of newsprint that passes for a Sunday newspaper in Ottawa Citizen-land, I came across an article reprinted from the UK's Sunday Telegraph. The article is headlined Babies On The Couch and it describes what is, apparently, a growing phenomenon: larger and larger numbers of toddlers and babies are being taken to see psychiatrists.

The article describes the experiences of a couple in London, England. Dad is a hedge fund manager, which I believe has something to do with finances, not horticulture. Mom's a lawyer. Pretty smart folks then, we can assume
Toby began his therapy when he was just one month old, at Dr Acquarone's parent-infant clinic at the School of Infant Mental Health in Hampstead, north London. His parents are among an increasing number who believe that good mental health cannot be established early enough.

...

"Dr Acquarone's sessions utterly changed my relationship with my son," says Miss Mientakeivitch, a lawyer. "We have the loving bond I had hoped for and he is a happy, healthy baby. Her work is tremendous: she taught me so much about what Toby was feeling and how to interpret the messages he was sending me. Her observations of Toby taught me such a lot about him."

Later on, we learn as an example, that one of the insights of the Great Doctor was that Mom should take off her glasses to let Toby see her eyes more clearly. I seem to remember that this advice is (a) contained in many books on parenting and (b) common sense. Nice work at $200 an hour for Dr. Acquarone.

So here we have two highly educated, intelligent people, who feel that they are so incapable of parenting their son using their own abilities that they have spent thousands and thousands of dollars on consultations and having the baby 'interviewed' by Dr. Acquarone. If people such as these don't feel comfortable parenting by intuition, common sense and a little judicious use of Google, who does?

How did Western society, collectively, reach the point where we have lost all confidence in our abilities to parent? When did having a child start to reduce high-achieving, intelligent people to uncertain ghosts of themselves, paralyzed with fear? Parenting is the most natural and instinctive role human beings can have. These are people who wouldn't think twice about their ability to read a client or a business associate, understand their body language, assess and predict people's likely behaviour, spot when someone is telling the truth or lying, and so on. They're high-powered people, confident in their abilities at work. Being a parent uses all the same skills. It's not rocket science.

When the highly educated, the elite, feel this way, it's easy to see why the idea that Nanny State's Early Childhood Educators know best has so much traction. No wonder we have an ever increasing army of professionals telling mothers that they can't do the job of raising happy, healthy children themselves. No, now you need some chick with a PhD to tell you your child will see you better if you take your glasses off.

It's time to expose this nonsense and give it the challenge it deserves in public. It's time to encourage all parents and parents-to-be out there to believe that they can do it themselves and that where their own child is concerned, if they trust their instincts and they focus on the child, they will end up knowing best.

As for the parents who feel the need of a $58,000 course of Dr. Acquarone's treatment, to them I say: You should have taken some time to practise a little first. Maybe start out with a Betta fish. Spend a few months learning to read fin-language and then move gently up the evolutionary ladder before attempting procreation. Either that, or spend that $58,000 more wisely and get your own heads fixed.

Thursday, October 26, 2006

Montague 18 : Guests Are Invited

I have sent an invitation to all candidates to submit a guest post in the week following the final all-candidates meeting. Watch this space.

I plan on taking the opinion polls down several days before voting day so as to avoid any inappropriate influence. Note that they are very unscientifc; there's no way to check whether someone is really from the area, although they do only permit one vote per browser as far as technology allows. Still, I thought it might be useful to put them up.

The Doggerel Coalition for Best Childcare

The Ontario Coalition for Better Childcare is sending the following resolution to all Ontario municipalities:

Resolution

Whereas thirty five years of research confirms the benefits of high quality child care for young children’s intellectual, emotional, social and physical development and later life outcomes; and

Whereas child care promotes the well-being of children and responds to the needs of parents, child care workers and the broader community by supporting quality of life so that citizens can fully participate in and contribute to the economic and social life of their community; and

Whereas recent studies clearly show trained and knowledgeable Early Childhood Educators and child care workers are the most important element in quality child care, and further that good wages and working conditions are associated with higher job satisfaction and morale, lower staff turnover all of which predict higher quality care

Therefore Be It Resolved that October 25, 2006 be designated the 6th annual “Child Care Worker & Early Childhood Educator Appreciation Day” in recognition of the influence, dedication and commitment of child care workers to children, their families and quality of life of the community.

The Doggerel Coalition for Best Childcare is proposing an alternative resolution:

Resolution

Whereas for thousands of years children have been raised by their parents in their own caves, mud huts, castles, semi-detacheds, bungalows, condos, yachts, and various other places; and

Whereas instutionalising children and taking them away from their parents, for example to the workhouse, used to be seen as undesirable; and

Whereas history shows that Victorian children were more numerate and literate at 10 years of age than are today's high-school graduates; and

Whereas thirty-five years of one-sided 'research' into the impact of institutional childcare cannot outweigh thousands of years of human history; and

Whereas human families and their children have enjoyed the company of canis domesticus as friend, companion, protector, nanny, playmate, teacher and student; and

Whereas Welsh Corgis are exceptional examples of canis domesticus

Therefore Be It Resolved that October 25, 2006 be designated the 1st annual “Welsh Corgis in Childcare Appreciation Day” in recognition of the influence, dedication and commitment of Welsh Corgis to children, their families and quality of life of the community.