Forget "Make Work" - Try "Take Work"

I know I’ll probably get some nasty feedback over this little brain fart of mine but what the hell. Besides, there are two things I really hate:

Keeping my mouth shut; and
Sitting in front of an idle keyboard.

Here goes.

Has anyone living in, or who has recently visited, the St. John’s area noticed that on almost every street there are countless signs practically begging people to apply for a job?

I drove down Torbay Road a couple of weeks ago and counted no less than 11 such signs in a 1 kilometer stretch. It was inspiring.

Granted most of those jobs are in the service sector but with the high demand for employees these days companies are now offering everything from medical plans to dental plans to flexible shifts, above market wages and a myriad of other perks.

If you look in any copy of the Independent or the Telegram the number of job ads has reached a point where they use up more and more pages every day. Soon the ads may create enough demand to keep the Grand Falls mill open for another hundred years, and the thing is, most often those jobs are high paying professional positions.

This new reality, where there are more jobs than applicants, may exist in the Metro area but once you move into rural parts of the province the picture is much bleaker.

The unemployment rate across the rest of the province is staggering.

With a provincial election underway this dual reality is providing fodder for the parties and has led some to shout from the rooftops that rural Newfoundland and Labrador has been neglected ever since the oil boom hit.

Well folks, I don’t believe that for a minute and neither should you, no matter how often you hear it said.

It isn’t true under the Williams government and it wasn’t true under the previous Liberal government.

In fact I’d be willing to argue that a great deal of focus has been placed on rural areas for a long, long time. Unfortunately most of that attention wasn't on what really mattered, like protecting the fish stocks before they were destroyed rather than building another unnecessary fish plant to help some candidate win an election.

It's not a matter of rural areas not getting any attention but of getting the wrong kind of attention.

Maybe it’s time someone looked at the entire problem from a completely different angle. One where politics is left out of the equation and where pandering to voters is not a concern.

If nobody else is willing to try it I will.

“It is not the job of government to make work”. There I said it and it feels good.

As someone far wiser than me once said, “It’s the job of government to keep the trains running on time”.

Granted that might be a little more difficult ever since our railway was ripped up and sold off some time ago, but the point is that governments shouldn’t be in the business of holding our hands and creating jobs for the sake of creating jobs.

The place of government is to make sure that essential services are delivered in the best way possible, that the public is safe on the streets and to foster an environment conducive to business growth. It’s business that should create employment, not government.

Yes, a responsible government should, and usually does, encourage business growth. They do this by offering tax breaks or other incentives to setup shop in strategic areas. They also try to court investment and market the benefits of the places they govern. That doesn’t mean, no matter what any candidate might say over the next two weeks, that government can, or even should, throw money at any industry that is clearly not salvageable or create work just to get people working.

That’s especially true in Newfoundland and Labrador these days.

I originally came from a small town and moved around the province and around the Country for years before finally settling in the St. John’s area. Essentially I went where the work took me. I didn’t want to leave my home town and I still hope to return there when I retire, but I did what I had to do. I’m still doing it.

I’m just thankful I managed to find a job where I can take a 5 hour drive on a long weekend to visit my home if I choose to do it.

Most people want to stay where they grew up, where they have family and where they are the most comfortable in their skin, but most of us can’t do that. This isn’t something that’s unique to Newfoundland and Labrador, it’s happening across Canada and around the world.

Business and industries generally congregate in large urban centers and attract employees from more rural areas. This isn’t some sort of conspiracy or plot. It’s just the way things are.

No matter how much oil or how much gas is produced and no matter what politicians may promise, most of the business spin off from the oil industry will continue land in the St. John’s area. That’s something the government has very little control over.

Business leaders usually want to locate where they can most easily find suppliers, are close to their customers and have a bigger pool of potential employees to choose from. This is true for direct oil industry employers as it is for secondary industries like IT companies, retail stores, restaurants, hotels, taxi services and the rest.

Why is it then that so many people believe that if there isn’t a job in their small town that they are being neglected and forgotten? Why do they look to government to spend millions to create employment in places where there is none and where business does not, for whatever reason, want to move?

Think about what that expectation would really mean if it were acted upon.

In today’s reality, it would mean that government revenues, including the tax dollars desperately needed for infrastructure, schools, hospitals and so on, would be eaten away trying to find ways to make employment in one part of the province while just a few hundred kilometers away, in another part of the province, companies are screaming out for new employees. Does that make sense?

When it comes to new industries like aquaculture, wind farms, smelters and the like there are valid reasons those need to be built outside of the city centers, and there is no doubt that this sort of development is, and will continue, to happen as viable opportunities arise. It’s doubtful however that those developments will grow fast enough to make a serious dent in the unemployment rate in rural Newfoundland and Labrador any time soon. That is also a reality.

Spending millions to try to create work in some areas while there is a severe shortage of workers in another is a recipe for economic disaster.

So why are there still those who believe that simply because there is a dual economy in the province, rural Newfoundland and Labrador is getting nothing from the oil boom?

As I noted, I’m originally from far outside the overpass but I now live near St. John’s. Do you know something? I get the same benefit from the oil industry and increased government revenues as most people in the province do, urban or rural.

I don’t get a cheque in my mail box every week. I don’t glide to work on gold paved streets and I don’t spend my days sipping champagne. I work for a living and more often than not I work damn hard only to drive home over a road full of potholes.

On the other hand, I do occasionally notice some improvement in highways across the island (it’s here that the folks in Labrador may have a far better argument than most about being forgotten or neglected).

I sometimes see new dialysis equipment, cancer clinics or seniors care facilities being built.

I see attention being paid to refurbishing schools or improvements being made to other government services.

I see more or different medications being covered by the government funded drug plan than in the past. (Though not nearly enough)

I see provincial debt slowly being addressed and I see the amount of income tax I pay every week reduced thanks to lower provincial taxes.

It’s these things that are made possible by an increase in provincial revenues and it is these things that are used to spread the wealth from the oil and gas sector around the province.

Don’t get me wrong. I’m not praising the current government for these things. It’s simply a fact that there is more money coming into provincial coffers today than there has been in the past and as a result more can be done.

More will continue to be done as time goes by, no matter which party wins the election on October 9. Though the specific spending priorities may change, the way the wealth is distributed will not.

If there are deficiencies in how services are dispersed across the province now or in the future then yes, by all means fight for more attention and better treatment, but don't for a minute believe that no benefits are finding their way to rural Newfoundland and Labrador simply because you can't find a job where you live.

If, instead of improving services, the next government opts to spread the wealth around by actually listening to those who believe they are being neglected and artificially prop up or extend the life of any industry that isn’t viable then we will all pay the price eventually.

It's simple folks.

Government should not spend its time and millions of dollars of our money trying to artificially create employment in one part of the province while there is a severe shortage of workers in another.

It’s all about keeping the trains running on time.

Editor's Note: (Though I had been considering a commentary on this topic for some time, I would like to take a moment to thank an anonymous poster over at Sue's Blog, which I visted the other day, for giving me the final inspiration I needed to get it finished.

Thanks as well to Sue for being so courteous when I asked how she felt about me running this piece so soon after the comment appeared on her site. You're one of a kind.)

PM Supports Seal Hunt - Denies Canada's Multiculturalism

What do Atlantic seals and multiculturalism have in common? They were both center stage when Stephen Harper visited New York this week.

I’ve often said politicians are eternally on standby to give their constituents something with one hand before quickly taking it away with the other. This week Stephen Harper took that practice to almost artistic levels, when he managed to display support for Canadian citizens and a total lack of support, at almost exactly the same time.

Arguably none were more directly impacted by both than the native peoples of Canada and the people of Newfoundland and Labrador.

Recently the North American Environmental Commission dismissed an application by two animal rights groups who claimed the Atlantic seal hunt violates international agreements on environmental protection. Though the application was dismissed, Harper, while in New York on Tuesday, was approached by reporters on the issue, it was there that he publicly showed his support for the annual Atlantic seal hunt by saying it (the hunt) is "dedicated today to humane and regulated practices."

When asked why Canada permits the hunt, Harper said anti-sealing groups present false information about the practice and that the clubbing of baby seals has been outlawed for over 20 years.

He went on to say, "The seal population is exploding in Canada - it's not an endangered species by any means.”

“There is no reason to discriminate against it any more than any other industry of animal husbandry. We will not be bullied or blackmailed into forcing people out of that industry who depend on the livelihood, based on things that are simply stories and allegations that are simply not true."

Well done Mr. Harper. Unfortunately your next statement, though also accurate, clearly pulled the rug out from under many of the same people you supported with that comment.

After giving the people of Atlantic Canada, native hunters and the people of Quebec, who are the primary participants in the hunt, such a strong show of support on the international stage Harper almost immediately turned around and exposed the total lack of understanding for those people that has existed in Canada for decades. To his credit, at least he had the stones to tell the truth rather than hide behind the standard rhetoric of most federal politicians.

When asked by another reporter why Canada is perceived with less hostility around the world than the U.S., even though the two have similar cultures, Harper’s response revealed his true feelings and a reality that has existed in Canada for years.

Harper responded by saying, among other things, that “…Canada's nature as a "bicultural country" gives politicians an inherent understanding of cultural differences on the world stage.

Now there’s a mouthful.

Canada has long billed itself to the world as a multicultural country, but Harper’s response at long last has revealed the truth to the world. The Prime Minister has, in one simple sentence, finally put to rest any misconceptions once and for all and removed the long standing façade that the government of Canada actually respects the cultural diversity of its people. It doesn’t.

No matter what the political rhetoric, Canada is not multicultural in the eyes of its government and the Prime Minister has now said as much.

It can only be assumed that by calling Canada a “bicultural” Country he was referring to the Anglophone and Francophone majority in Canada, but what of the other cultures that exist here? Are they of no value? Do they not exist in Canada, or does Ottawa simply refuse to support their diversity?

What of the cultural identity of people in Newfoundland and Labrador? People who were a separate and distinct nation before entering Canada after world war two? Were the people of Canada wrong when, in a poll conducted just a few years ago, more than 70% of them said they viewed the people of Newfoundland and Labrador as a unique culture?

What about the various native groups in Canada? Are the Innu no longer a distinct culture?

What about the Inuit or the Mi’kmaq? Do they not have their own culture?

What about Canada’s many immigrant citizens? Canadians who originally hailed from places like China, India, Germany, Russia and so on, are they not representative of separate and distinct cultures in Canada or does Ottawa simply hope to assimilate them and bury their past and their traditions?

Though Harper’s lack of support for the cultural diversity of Canada is disgusting, to his credit he is the first Prime Minister actually willing to admit the truth. The only cultures that matter to the government of Canada are those who account for most of the votes needed to get a party elected and keep them in office.

For those who still labor under the perception that multiculturalism is alive and well in Canada, Harper’s comment that Canada understands cultural differences around the world because it is itself a “bicultural” society, should send a clear message that the government of Canada truly has no understanding of cultural differences around the world or at home.

Harper referring to Canada as “bicultural”, rather than multicultural, clearly identifies a shift in direction that has been happening in Canada for decades, one that has been clear to those who live in one of Canada’s forgotten cultures.

It’s a shift that has seen Canada increasingly align with U.S. policy and under Stephen Harper that alignment, thanks to his silencing of the voices of people who would fight it, is gaining momentum every day since the Conservative decision to cut funding to women’s rights groups, court challenges and more.

The so called “melting pot” of the U.S homogenizes all cultures into the mainstream, while officially recognizing only two distinct groups of people, Anglophone and Hispanic, at the expense of all others.

Canada has long touted itself as a society that celebrates multicultural diversity in its people, though it has never really done anything, other than talk about it, to prove that it respects any distinct culture outside the French speaking people in Quebec.

The multicultural mosaic we have all heard so much about may be something Canada’s political leaders claim to support, but in reality, is Canada any different than the U.S when it comes to respecting and celebrating diversity?

Newfoundland & Labrador Leader’s Debate

The leaders of the PC, Liberal and NDP parties participated in an election debate at NTV studios on Tuesday evening. With two weeks remaining before voters go to the polls this was the only opportunity for the public to see all three go head to head over the issues.

The opening remarks of the three party leaders were designed to deliver a targeted message and they did just that. While NDP leader, Lorraine Michael, and PC leader, Danny Williams, both appeared calm and composed, Liberal leader Gerry Reid often stumbled over his words, looked tired and came across as very uncomfortable in front of the camera. As one viewer noted, “…he looked like he just woke up and someone hustled him behind the podium before he could wipe the sleep from his eyes”.

While Reid spoke of his party being a potential winner in the upcoming election, the NDP leader immediately positioned her party as the right choice to form a strong and effective opposition. It was a position that smartly conveyed her understanding of the realities of the current political climate and allowed her to effectively take a swipe at the Liberal party. A clear and perhaps effective move to woo voters from the Liberal camp.

The polls show Williams’ popularity in the province at well above 70% leading into this campaign, leaving him with little room to improve his standing during the debate. The leaders of the two other parties meanwhile had hoped to use the debate as a springboard to make up some much needed ground on the Tories.

During the debate Williams accomplished his objectives by holding his ground and getting his message out while the NDP leader, Lorraine Michael, came across as smooth, composed, and calm. This potentially made her the biggest winner of the evening by affording the NDP an opportunity to siphon off some support from her clearly unprepared Liberal counterpart.

During an early exchange the Liberal leader almost appeared to be reaching out to the NDP in an attempt to have Michael enter into a sort of “tag team” against Williams. Michael proved too politically savvy to fall for the tactic and instead countered by going on the offensive against Reid, proving that while she has only led her party for about a year, she clearly understands the realities of the situation. With the Tories riding high in the polls, any additional support her party hopes to gain will have to come from inside the Liberal camp. Michael’s performance, and Reid’s lack of composure, may have served to help the NDP in that cause.

At one point the Liberal leader opened himself up to attack by broaching the topic of Newfoundland and Labrador’s dilapidated schools and blaming the Williams government for the situation. His statement opened the door for the Tory leader to point out that the schools did not fall apart in the short four years the time Williams' government has been in office but rather over a much longer period of time, a reference to the fact that the Liberal party had previously been in power for more than a decade.

From a technical perspective the debate was poorly organized and the format often allowed extended periods when the leaders, primarily Williams and Reid, shouted or talked over one another making it difficult for viewers to understand what either man was saying. While this sort of exchange also took place during periods when the NDP leader was speaking, overall her exchanges were much more civilized and effective.

During the closing remarks Williams and Michael both spoke clearly and calmly. Michael focused on her party and what it could bring to the legislature while Williams stood on his record as premier and invoked the spirit of patriotism and autonomy he is most known for. Liberal leader, Gerry Reid, once again came across as being unprepared and uncomfortable while continuing to stumble over his words as he had done during the entire evening. An evening that was clearly not a good one for the Liberal leader.