All posts by James W. Breckenridge

Never … until politically convenient.

Once again Stephen Harper and his Conservatives have demonstrated that their espoused principles are subject to change when ever the principles become inconvenient to adhere to; that promises made by Harper and the Conservatives are worthless in the face of political expediency or advantage.

$2,347.200.00 per year is the minimum cost of Mr. Harper’s patronage senate appointments to party faithful. $2,347.200.00 is merely the direct salary costs and does not reflect any of additional costs or the cost of perks for the 18 new senators.

Watching Mr. Harper and the Conservatives tap dance and try to spin this policy reversal of convenience serves to make it ever clearer that Mr. Harper and the Conservatives are business-as-usual politicians worried only about their own power and re-election.

Watching the bizarrely grotesque behaviours of all the politicians sent to Ottawa in the recent election makes one thing obvious.

That if we want real change in the way parliament behaves it is up to Canadian citizens to find and elect MPs who are not representatives of any political party; MPs who answer to the people they represent and not to an autocrat or political party; MPs who will have to answer or explain their decisions directly to the people they represent.

This may well make for “messier” governance in parliament and take more effort on the part of voters, but our current politicians have made it clear that this is the only way we will get rid of business-as-usual politics and get MPs focused on doing a good job and addressing the real issues facing Canada instead of worrying about their personal ideological agendas, power and re-election.

Wishing …

Please accept with no obligation, implied or implicit, my best wishes for an environmentally conscious, socially responsible, low-stress, non-addictive, gender neutral, celebration of the winter solstice holiday, practiced within the most enjoyable traditions of the religious persuasion of your choice, or secular practices of your choice, with respect for the religious/secular persuasions and/or traditions of others, or their choice not to practice religious or secular traditions at all.

I also wish you a fiscally successful, personally fulfilling, and medically uncomplicated recognition of the onset of the generally accepted calendar year 2009, but not without due respect for the calendars of choice of other cultures whose contributions to society have helped make Canada great (not to imply that Canada is necessarily greater than any other country), and without regard to the race, creed, color, age, physical ability, religious faith, or sexual preference of the wishee.

By accepting this greeting, you are accepting these terms:
-This greeting is subject to clarification or withdrawal.
-It is freely transferable with no alteration to the original greeting.
-It implies no promise by the wisher to actually implement any of the wishes for her/himself or others, and is void where prohibited by law, and is revocable at the sole discretion of the wisher.

This wish is warranted to perform as expected within the usual application of good tidings for a period of one year, or until the issuance of a subsequent holiday greeting, whichever comes first, and warranty is limited to replacement of this wish or issuance of a new wish at the sole discretion of the wisher.

Wishing all a …

Please accept with no obligation, implied or implicit, my best wishes for an environmentally conscious, socially responsible, low-stress, non-addictive, gender neutral, celebration of the winter solstice holiday, practiced within the most enjoyable traditions of the religious persuasion of your choice, or secular practices of your choice, with respect for the religious/secular persuasions and/or traditions of others, or their choice not to practice religious or secular traditions at all.

I also wish you a fiscally successful, personally fulfilling, and medically uncomplicated recognition of the onset of the generally accepted calendar year 2009, but not without due respect for the calendars of choice of other cultures whose contributions to society have helped make Canada great (not to imply that Canada is necessarily greater than any other country), and without regard to the race, creed, color, age, physical ability, religious faith, or sexual preference of the wishee.

By accepting this greeting, you are accepting these terms:
-This greeting is subject to clarification or withdrawal.
-It is freely transferable with no alteration to the original greeting.
-It implies no promise by the wisher to actually implement any of the wishes for her/himself or others, and is void where prohibited by law, and is revocable at the sole discretion of the wisher.

This wish is warranted to perform as expected within the usual application of good tidings for a period of one year, or until the issuance of a subsequent holiday greeting, whichever comes first, and warranty is limited to replacement of this wish or issuance of a new wish at the sole discretion of the wisher.

Abbotsford’s $expensive$ AHL pipedream

I cannot predict whether or not Abbotsford will get an AHL hockey franchise.

What I can predict is that if Abbotsford should get an AHL franchise all the financial dealings and contracts between Abbotsford City Council on behalf of the City of Abbotsford, the investors bringing the franchise to the city and the AHL will be buried deep in the bowels of City Hall and securely hidden from the people who will be footing the cost of the required yearly seven-figure subsidies – the beleaguered and impoverished Abbotsford taxpayer.

I can also predict council will have a multitude of excuses for why they will not or cannot release the information that would allow calculation of how many millions of dollars taxpayers will be required to pay to subsidize any AHL team in order to entice that AHL team to locate in Abbotsford.

AHL President David Andrews made it clear that any Abbotsford team will be responsible to fully subsidize teams increased travel costs to travel to Abbotsford for games. The expense of paying this cost will be in addition to the increased travel costs a team located in Abbotsford will face in travelling to away games.

Simple mathematics reveals that covering increased travel costs will require 1 – 2 million dollars a season. Where is that money going to come from? Where else but Abbotsford taxpayers?

There are numerous other costs and subsidies I can think of that could well end up coming out of Abbotsford taxpayer pockets in order to entice a hockey team to Abbotsford.

Which is why full disclosure on all the costs and contracts connected and/or associated with the new arena complex and its operations is required. While it may be publicly embarrassing to leave the new arena dark, it is likely the most economically and financially sound decision to make.

With the economy in the worsening shape it is, the besieged taxpayers of Abbotsford simply cannot afford to pour millions of dollars of operating subsidies into the arena every year on top of the millions paid out in debt and interest repayments for sole purpose of allowing council to save face.

Path to Hell paved with “for their own good”

A chill went down my spine and across my soul listening to Vancouver’s new Mayor Gregor Robertson talking about forcing people, “for their own good”, to behave in a manner he judges is an appropriate and wise.

Frighteningly no one on the news report disputed his statement and others echoed the “force them for their own good” sentiment. Hopefully this lack of a disagreeing cautionary voice was a result of editorial decisions by news staff and not from a lack of those questioning the wisdom of going down the “force them for their own good” path – no matter how well intentioned the steps onto that very slippery slope may be.

The police officer who let her light her candles made the correct decision. Someone was appalled that I would give candles to homeless people living in tents or other makeshift shelter. I know how important they can be to providing heat to survive in frigid weather.

The same day the news had reports of people killed in house fires. Does that mean that we should force people not to live in houses because fires will happen, houses will burn and people will die?

Yes the death of the woman who died in the fire in her modified cart was tragic, but the tragedy was not that she refused to come inside. The tragedy is that we as a society have failed to put in place the resources that would have allowed for the building of a relationship of trust with the woman and the existence of housing/shelter she would have found acceptable.

The true tragedy will be if we heedlessly, thoughtlessly plunge down the “force them for their own good” path. History is full of examples of what happens when we as a society decide what is good for somebody or a group and force them “for their own good” to do what we, not they, want.

Just ask members of our First Nations who were forced into residential schools “for their own good” while looking at the damage done to our First Nations and their cultures and society in the name of “their own good”.

In this case forcing people to behave in a manner “for their own good” is not about their own good but about making society feel better, salving society’s conscience over the consequences of its decision to abandon these most vulnerable people and all to often avoiding having to invest the time, resources and effort to deal with the issues in a manner that would truly be of benefit to those in need.

I have been one of the people who Mr. Robertson wants to “force for their own good” to behave as he sees fit.

While I acknowledge that appropriate housing and supports would have been helpful, what I really needed was the time and personal space to find my way to recovery. “Forcing me for my own good” would have denied me the chance to find that path and to find recovery and myself.