Please call again. We will be happy to serve you another time!

15Jan10

Ziad’s View
Today’s current issue! Harper shuts down Parliament! … Today’s current issue! Harper shuts down Parliament! Think this is a typo; well think again! In just over a year, Harper has effectively shut down Parliament TWICE and shut out our representatives from one of the few democratic avenues available. As a concerned citizen, I will offer what is only my personal speculation as to why our dear Prime Minister chose this ‘high road’ and what this will mean for the future of this country.

For one, I am fairly confident that Mr. Harper decided to adopt this plan very simply because the Liberals were not doing so well in the polls; by effectively taking himself out of any direct contact with politicians or the media, Mr. Harper can avoid being challenged on any one issue and he can avoid slipping in the polls. The calculation, as I see it, is as follows: there will most likely be a summer election, sometime around July or August, at the latest September. By proroguing Parliament early enough, he may indeed slip a few points in the polls, but by effectively shutting down Parliament, his opponents cannot exactly make Mr. Harper look any better or worse and by the time of this summer’s election, many will have forgotten or simply come to terms with this event and he can guarantee himself another term. This is very simply an extended campaign tour that will occur at the expense of democracy in Canada. If he manages to keep his lead in the polls throughout this break period, Mr. Harper will begin a new session where I imagine he hopes the economy will have rebounded, the questions of torture in Afghanistan will have boiled over and all the other parties will be scrambling around to demand answers as to why Parliament was suspended. At that point, Mr. Harper will call an election, agreeing that if the other parties think this was so absurd, they should take him to the polls. With that, he will be swept into power again, with a minority government of course, and he will have effectively wasted all our time and money. Once again, this is my own speculation; if it will materialize as such is another question and we will have to wait and see.

However, I also believe that Mr. Harper may have miscalculated. Shutting down Parliament once is worrisome; shutting down Parliament twice is just absurd. A recent Toronto Star article cited that Mr. Ignatieff will be reconnecting with his academic roots as he travels across the country, visiting Canadian universities and making a connection with students across the country. Even the citizens who do not care about what issues are debated in Parliament are feeling a bit annoyed for the very simple reason that tax payers dollars are funding politicians who unfortunately cannot fulfill a primary component of their duties: debating issues in Parliament. Why Mr. Harper feels he is justified to take such steps is beyond me and makes me wonder if accountability is even a part of the Conservative dictionary. Parliament is but one of the few avenues available to politicians to lobby the government in regards to problems and concerns that have been raised in their own constituencies; closing it down is not, in my opinion, the best option right now for Canadians!

Sujoy’s View
The topic of prorogation has been hashed and rehashed on numerous blogs all over the internet, television and other forms of media. With two prorogations since 2008, many Canadians are by now aware of what it means; essentially a shut down of parliament – which in both instances is being used as part of the political strategy of the Conservative Party. I can’t say that I agree with the shut down of parliament for the reasons that have been so widely circulated through our media. It is not a good sign of the health of our democracy when parliament can be shut down in such a manner. The fact that it can legally be shut down, with nary a constitutional law breached, or a federal statute transgressed provides us with even more evidence that political powers continue to become concentrated in the hands of the few political elite that now fill the ranks of the governing party. It would be interesting to see what other obscure parliamentary tricks there are in the rule books to keep a party in power (perhaps a blog topic for the future).

I am happy to see that in this political climate (and in Ottawa’s frigid climate as well) people are exercising their democratic right to protest the situation. Mobilizing through newer forms of media such as social net working sites (facebook comes to mind) as a focal point of action is a testament to the ingenuity and innovations that ordinary citizen understand and use effectively in an evermore hyper-linked world. If the shear number of virtual citizens voicing their opinion is any reflection of the number of people protesting on January 23rd – whether on parliament hill, Queens park, or any number of sites across Canada, then we will certainly have some interesting “democracy in action” to look forward to.

Filed under: Democracy, Elections, Ottawa, Parliament, political parties   |  Leave a Comment

Call me.

17Dec09

Sujoy’s View

A new mobile phone carrier is entering the Canadian market. Globalive has opened stores for its wireless product line, Wind Mobile to sell in every province (except Quebec) just in time for the Christmas season. Competing against the three telecom giants Bell, Rogers and Telus is an ambitious goal for Globalive CEO Anthony Lacavera and his team. They plan to capture four to six million subscribers within five years. With hopes of introducing some much-needed competition into the Canadian airwaves, consumers are salivating at the possibility of lower costs that we as Canadians incur for the privilege of mobile telephone service.

While I look forward to the potential for reduced fees for consumers, there are two issues that stand out to me with Globalive – firstly the company has $508 million of its debt held by an Egyptian company called Orascom. Not that there is anything inherently wrong with Egyptian ownership, but such fulsome support by another company suggests that it would want some influence in how Globalive operates its carrier service brand, Windmobile. Globalive maintains that it is an entirely Canadian controlled company.

The second major sticking point (again related to foreign ownership) is the fact that the CRTC rejected Globalive’s license request to set up a cell phone company in Canada; this was overturned by Industry minister Tony Clemente. The CRTC saw the involvement of Orascom as infringing on Canadian content requirements, and as such decided that it was not suitable for a license. The CRTC was rendered impotent and irrelevant as the minister had final say in the fate of this company. What does this say for the CRTC? Is it ineffectual, impractical, and wrong in insisting on Canadian ownership for a telecom company? This may set a precedent for other companies (telecom or otherwise) wanting to set up in Canada with a ton of foreign cash at their disposal; the government puts itself in a more difficult position with respect to denying entry of foreign firms into the Canadian market if they see a company with a lot of capital ready to invest. Foreign ownership however is nothing new to Canadian industrial policy. If it means lower prices for consumers then I welcome Globalive’s initiative in seeking out foreign backers; if however after a while the company gets into trouble in a very cut throat industry with deep pocketed players, then I hope the Canadian government doesn’t have to bail them out. Good luck to us all.

Ziad’s View

As Wind Mobile blows into stores nearest you, it is worth actually reflecting what this will mean for the mobile market in Canada and how the Big Three will react to their new competitor. There is no doubt that even the fear of a new company entering the Canadian market startled the Big Three phone companies and they launched a campaign to demonstrate that they could change and were willing to play hardball if need be. I am sure anyone who keeps up with the constantly changing and at times confusing rate plans offered by our current carriers will have noticed that System Access Fees (SAF), those fees that ranged from $7.70-$9.70 a month to run the networks are no longer charged to customers activating new plans. Bell and Telus recently launched their new HSPA network to rival the Rogers network and all companies are doing all they can to offer the largest selection of phones to appeal to as many people as possible- in particular smartphones!

With Wind Mobile, contracts no longer matter as everyone purchases their phone at whatever the full cost of the phone is rather than receiving a subsidized price on a phone and being tied into a one-two-or three year contract. On the one hand there are no more contracts which is great; on the other hand, do I really have the 450 bucks to dish out for a new blackberry? While the phones are not exactly cheap with the Big Three, as long as you operate within their ever-so-stringent rules and guidelines, you can manage to get a couple hundred dollars off a phone and in truth, the subsidized price is helpful at times. The Wind Mobile plans in general are something all on their own and while certain features seem to be a cheaper- for now at least- you are left to wonder for how long this will remain so. As they continue to operate in the Canadian market, and if sales are not what they expect, I would ponder if these fees will slowly climb up, justified by the need to keep the network up to date, or to offer better service in general. I am in no way a pessimist, but I think that this is a very tight market and while the Big Three will and have gone down in price, our new competitor may have to go up in price to compete and remain a viable company. Flexibility and adjusting to the market is crucial if they hope to avoid the fate of Virgin Mobile Canada, as it was recently acquired by BCE.

The chance of Egypt based Orascom acquiring a majority of Globalive, the ‘parent company’ to Wind Mobile in Canada, is interesting as well. You have to wonder for how long this owner will be willing to fight it out in the tight Canadian market; if things work out well, I am sure they will be here to stay. If not, they may have to slowly raise their prices just to keep up. Whatever happens, it is pretty obvious that the dominant carriers in the market have made some moves to better situate themselves in the future. No more SAF, cheaper plans all around and a much more aggressive campaign strategy all point to a phone market that probably will not change as much any time soon.

Filed under: Uncategorized   |  5 Comments
Tags: canada, communication, CRTC, foreign ownership, telecom, Tony Clemente

The ‘Miller Years’

19Nov09

Ziad’s View

Deciding the legacy of Mr. Miller is particularly tricky for me as I have never lived in the city of Toronto and while in theory some of his ideas may have seemed great, how they operated on the ground level and how they were received by Torontonians may differ greatly. I am then, clearly arguing as an outsider looking in and while I make frequent visits to the city, whether for entertainment, educational purposes, or just to simply have a good time, I think it is important to recognize the differences in opinion that stem from one who has lived and experienced the policies of Mr. Miller and for those as myself, who can analyze his actions only through an outside lens. But with this disclaimer aside, reflecting on Toronto politics during the Miller years, it seems like at the most basic level, Mr. Miller earned some important political victories that for me were well worth the fight.

Mr. Miller had his opinions and beliefs and he seems to have worked to implement these in such initiatives as the Mayor’s Community Safety Plan, the Clean and Beautiful City Initiative, garbage diversification, green projects, bike lanes, green roofs and transportation issues. Mr. Millers ambitious transportation plans seems to be his strongest legacy; streetcars, subways and buses have received new funding and from the standpoint of an individual living in the suburbs, this is a wonderful idea I can only wish for in my own city. How the plan will operate on the ground level is something that I simply cannot speak to, as many others cannot, because only time will tell how beneficial this will be in reducing traffic and pollution and offering people from all social classes better transportation so that they can avoid the hassles and the cost that come along with owning a car.

Mr. Miller seems to have been a passionate leader with his own priorities set straight; whether these matched the priorities of all Torontonians is a different issue and always up for debate. But I would argue that these two important facets of his administration, environmental projects and the transportation, are issues that have typically not received due attention (in particular the former of the two). Has he solved all the problems related to these issues: absolutely not. Has he made it a priority on the political agenda? I think it is safe to say that at the least, he has done this.

I hope the future mayor will be one who is proud of their city (as Mr. Miller was) and will commit themselves to promoting Toronto as a wonderful city where all are welcome. I hope a mayor who continues the mantra of environmentally friendly initiatives and works to better the transportation systems would be great. I see Toronto as a city to be proud of; I hope that it continues to be a world-class city and I hope it continues to hold an image as a city that is multicultural, diverse and dynamic.

Sujoy’s View

David Miller has been a formidable politician; I would venture to say that he is in fact the Seinfeld of municipal politics by consistently having election platforms about nothing. His first election win came on the heels of a proposal to stop the bridge to the island airport in Toronto. Citing concerns about noise pollution and the increased traffic that such an expansion would bring. How a man can get elected on an issue that affects this tiny southwestern corner of downtown Toronto to this day boggles my mind; if you don’t live in that neighbourhood, you wouldn’t care about noise pollution – and yet he was able to make this issue salient with enough voters across Toronto. Because Miller stopped the bridge, the developer (Robert Deluce) sued the City of Toronto and the Federal Government (who also withdrew their funding for the bridge) and was successfully able to settle for $35 million dollars of compensation (money that one can safely assume came from that final guarantor of all public debts, the tax payer). Today, business is booming for Porter Airlines (with its hub at the island airport) and seems to be expanding everyday. Miller did nothing to stop expansion of that airport (if that was such a bad thing in the first place) and yet he remained in power long after this fiasco.

Regarding crime, I think Miller’s policies have been a mixed record at best. We did have the “summer of the gun” during his tenure where it seemed that every other day there was a shooting in the GTA. His response was a ban on hand guns; I then wondered, if these people would be law abiding enough to make sure they don’t shoot someone with an illegally acquired gun. My answer is no, so the ban seems pointless and sounds like a big waste of money.

Miller has been fortunate for the support he has received for public transportation from the federal and provincial governments, I am very excited at the prospect of making the GTA fully connected with light rail transit that criss-crosses the area; still his proposed 1000 km of bike trails (in a city that’s covered by snow at least 4 months a year) seems impractical. I know its about making Toronto more green and eco-friendly, but I have always been critical of how useful (and by that I mean safe) bike lanes are in the winter – if they can only be used for eight months a year, what does that do to traffic? Does it mean narrower lanes, more traffic, more idling cars?

What I would like to see in a mayor is someone who actually gets elected on substance; a person who has principles and real political goals that are a bit more substantive than wedge issues that are somehow blown way out of proportion. It should be someone who knows Toronto and municipal politics inside and out.

Filed under: Immigration, Ontario, Toronto, political parties   |  Leave a Comment

We bet you couldn’t, (and hope you haven’t had to) do this to get here.

27Oct09

Sujoy’s view

An article posted on the CBC news website highlighted the issue of illegal immigration to Canada.

We all know that the world is a far from a fair place; not only that – it forces some people to take what seems like unimaginable risks to improve their life, or at the very least preserve it. The instance of 76 men found on a ship of the coast of Vancouver last week raises some questions about the inequalities that exist in the world – there are a number of issues that can be addressed by this story by the CBC, but the one I want to focus is on non-conventional immigration to Canada – in other words refugee claims. Should Canada be accepting refugees that arrive on boats in our coastal cities? Does it support a human trafficking industry, and does this industry perceive Canada as an easy destination for human smuggling? These are some of the questions TtoO would like to raise this week and respond to.

Ziad’s view

Should Canada accept these, along with other refugees, is a difficult question and I make no claim to having a solution. My natural instinct would be to accept them all as I feel the life we enjoy here in Canada can and should be shared with all. However, to say that Canada, or any country that has some level of peace and stability should simply accept all the refugees, would not really strike at the heart of the issue and reveal exactly why these refugees were forced to flee their countries in the first place. There should be a global effort and a concerted effort to understand why refugees have fled their countries and Canada, as a leading democratic nation, should play a leading role in this effort. Of course, this would mean interfering in state borders and sending peace missions to uphold stability, and as has been seen with the United Nations, this task is never easy. But I do know that the situation is worsening in many parts of the world and it is crucial we act now to build a stronger and healthier global community.

Filed under: Canadian Immigration, Human trafficking, Immigration, Settlement, refugees   |  7 Comments

To all members of the blogging world:

15Oct09

Today’s topic is interestingly enough on blogging itself and the freedom to express oneself; or rather, the willingness to do so. As many of you know, my colleague and I have been blogging in the virtual world for a few months now, and while there have been days that a few of our cyber members respond to our blog discussion or comment on our views, it has typically been a high volume of people viewing, and a very minimal number of people responding. As such, we decided that it may be worth putting the question up to our readers as to why no intense debate or discussion has really formulated around many of our blog entries. Whatever the reason may be, we would love to hear the answers and comments as this can certainly only strengthen our endeavour and provide an all too important glimpse into the mind’s of our cyber followers. The nature of the internet being as it is, there will probably be a very small chance that any of us will ever meet beyond the pages of this blog; however, for the next few months, and hopefully years, I would love to know what interests you as readers of a student directed blog and what direction we should take in topic discussions. Are we provocative enough? Is there room for debate? What topics interest you?

In conclusion, what I am asking for is our readers to tell us what you would like to see more of, and what we should stray from. And most importantly, how can we engage you, our readers, to reply and debate the topics posted and offer your own opinion/view. We live in a 21st century democracy and there is no better time or place then NOW to take this opportunity and make our voices heard. Whether here on this blog, or in the larger, more serious world beyond, we must always make our voices heard and demand not only a venue to speak, but an ear to listen. Let us have fun while we are at it! Who said debates had to be boring? To conclude, I would love to hear your thoughts on this issue! — Ziad

Check out the 100 words or less section this week for a post by Sujoy!!!

Filed under: GTA, Ontario, Ottawa, Toronto   |  2 Comments
Tags: blogging, Democracy, private, public, Rights, Voter apathy, Voters

To our health

04Oct09

Sujoy’s view

How do Canadians perceive their quality of health care? Some would say it’s the best in the world, but I’m usually not a fan of such celebratory claims; it implies that having the best care means we don’t have to improve on it, and that’s certainly not the case in Canada. In fact, a recent survey by the Conference Board of Canada ranked our health care system as tenth out of sixteen developed nations, the same ranking as last year. When you think of the problems of Canadian health care, issues such as wait times, availability of doctors (family physicians in particular) and cost are commonly discussed as things we need to work on as a society. I agree that there is always room for improvement in health care. Certainly there are regions, particularly in northern and Aboriginal communities where doctors are unwilling to settle compared to large urban centres. How then are these regions meant to be served equitably with quality care? Part of the answer may come from the culture of curative medicine which is such a large part of health care today, rather than preventative medicine. Campaigns for preventing teenagers from smoking or encouraging a balanced diet, and active living are so important to health care over all – and they do work well as we have seen that smoking has become more and more taboo; but there is still a huge need for awareness about these problems.

Costs are driven up by health problems associated with these lifestyle choices, and if we want a higher level of care we need to encourage preventative medicine practices. Furthermore, on the topic of educating the public, they need to be made aware of what constitutes a visit to the doctor. Too often emergency rooms are crowded with people who have a cold, or something completely trivial – it’s an asymmetry of knowledge and a hypochondriac-creating-media which makes you think that any symptom of any illness is a life threatening one. Admittedly, this is a hard thing to gauge and is one of the questions I struggle with when I think about health care.

Ziad’s view
Since the early days of public health care in Saskatchewan, there has been a constant debate surrounding the feasibility of a public health care system and its future within an expanding Canadian society. Nevertheless, whether we like it or not, public health care has become a part of our social fabric and while we may have a ‘B’ health care system, according to the latest report released by the Conference Board of Canada, it is still something I think we all take pride in and view as our fundamental right. Even more than that, it is what sets us apart from such countries as the United States of America, with their privately run, for-profit driven system.

Public health care is an indispensable feature of Canadian society and should continue to receive government funding. Health care should be and remain a fundamental service for all members of the Canadian polity and any undermining of the Canadian public system should be monitored closely and largely limited. It is important to realize that improving the health care system is necessary to build a stronger Canadian polity. Marginalized peoples access to health care needs to be improved, in particular Aboriginals. Just take a look at the recent Globe and Mail article that reveals health officials sent body bags up to Northern Manitoba Aboriginal communities as ‘flu-fighting supplies’ (See link at bottom of post).

Educating the public on how to prevent an illness is also a key facet of any health care system. With a stress on educating the public on health care, doctors and hospitals would be relieved of more minor concerns and the population in general could avoid patterns of poor health.

Ultimately, as the debate rages south of the border around health care and the public-vs.-private option, we can take consolation in the fact that we have a system, if supported and protected, can continue to move in the right direction and remain a central facet of our social services.

(Globe and mail Link- http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/native-leaders-reject-apology-for-body-bag-blunder/article1292295/)

Filed under: Ontario   |  Leave a Comment
Tags: Aboriginal, Conference Board of Canada, Health Care, Medicine, private, public

And the gloves come off…! Political Attack Ads in the Canadian Political Party System

20Sep09

Ziad’s View

A few weeks ago as I was watching TV and enjoying what little freedom I had before the realities of university hit me once again, I came across a political attack ad launched by the Conservatives portraying Liberal leader Michael Ignatieff as a ‘just visiting’ Canadian. While I was annoyed behind the concept of a political attack ad, I was surprisingly amused by the effectiveness of the message and the quality of the ad. And as the days went on and I spoke with more and more of my friends, I heard the same opinion expressed over and over again; the Conservatives have got a great ad out that successfully depicts all the not necessarily negative qualities about Ignatieff in a rather disapproving manner.

At the crux of the problem is something more than just the enormous amount of funding that is wasted in the silly game of attack ads or the dismal level of respect for one’s opponent; the real problem is that these ads do not address any current issue that the average Canadian actually cares about. Health care, education, the economy, political reform, democracy, families, the environment; whatever the issue may be, there is simply no dialogue on these crucial issues that should be on the top of the list of all political parties. Now this is in no way an attack on the Conservatives, as all parties have engaged, in some level, in the politics of attacking an opponent or individual personal characteristics rather than focussing on issues that truly matter. However, there is a specific focus on the recent Conservative attack ads because these same ads were what drove Stephane Dion out of politics and successfully destroyed his campaign.

Politics should not be reduced to thirty second political attack ads that are really character assassinations. I need and want a leader for Canada that understands the issues, respects his/her opponent, appreciates the right to be different and the right to have a differing view and most importantly I want a leader willing to engage the public in the problems that concern us most. I do not want theatrics, drama or politics as usual; integrity and respect are principles that cannot be abandoned.

Sujoy’s View

Attack ads are the war drums of politics – they signal to a largely apathetic public that something is rotten in the state of…the Liberal party? Maybe that was the goal of the Conservatives when they chose to attack Micheal Ignatieff – whether it’s for his dithering loyalty between Canada and the US, or more recently, reminding Canadians of his “coalition if necessary but not necessarily coalition” attitude. Either way, the Conservatives have very effectively used attack ads to their advantage.

A political attack ad that highlights and critiques what a politician says or does is fair game in my opinion. So much of politics is about making other people look bad, rather than discussing what makes a certain party or individual good; it’s is perhaps a bit misguided but it is effective, and appealing to the public. It may be more logical and relevant to discuss platform issues in a campaign commercial, rather than spending hard earned fundraiser dollars (and some tax money as well) on grainy black and white pictures of party leaders, but how else are people made interested in politics?

You can march out all the policy you want, there will always be a segment of the population that just does not care about politics – they are too comfortable with the status quo and really don’t face the every day threats to their freedoms or rights to want to do anything about it. Politics is taken for granted by many of us; it’s a given that we will have a stable government, that there are laws to protect us, that we have security provided by the state; why should people care about politics if none of these values are threatened no matter who forms the government? Ultimately, it is voter apathy that allows political attack ads to be effective, and if that’s the only way people are engaged in politics – through 30 second sound bites on television – then so be it, we deserve the politicians we get.

Filed under: Ontario, Ottawa, political parties   |  3 Comments
Tags: Advertising, Attack ads, Conservative Party, Liberal Party, Voter apathy, Voters

To pay or not to pay? That is the question!

08Sep09

Sujoy’s View

Paid parking is a veritable cash cow for universities, but if Toronto City Councillor Howard Moscoe has his way, it soon won’t be for York University. The issue he raises is the case of Gabriela Gueorguieva – a fourth year student who planned to attend teacher’s college. These plans however were thwarted by her dozens of unpaid parking tickets which over four years has amounted to $2 000. As with any outstanding balance at York (be it 50 cents for an overdue library book, or thousands of dollars as in this case), this prevents her from graduating, or even from ordering transcripts to send to teacher’s college.

While I “enjoy” paying for parking about as much as the next person, what Gabriela did in this situation was totally unjustified. Firstly, I find it curious that for these past four years, she (or her household) could afford gas, insurance, maintenance and of course the initial cost associated with owning a vehicle, but not the parking fee. Public transit options to York are ample, they aren’t as luxurious as having your own private horseless carriage to school, but they do the job. If money was an issue, Gabriela could have easily saved a lot of car expenses by taking either the TTC, GO or VIVA transit lines to York for example.

Secondly, her hopes that the regulations would be changed in such a way that she would not have to pay seems at best naive, and at worst dishonest. Gabriela may have a sliver of justification arising from the fact that York University is not a municipality like the City of Toronto. As such, York has no recourse that affects vehicle licensing or registration to enforce payment; its only option is to withhold transcripts and degrees, so that’s exactly what the school is rightly doing. Perhaps the change she is hoping for is that the City of Toronto would step in as the parking authority for York University and void her tickets.

In the end, it’s difficult to justify not paying these tickets – If you want the luxury of being able to drive to school, then pay for it. Don’t try and skirt regulations and then complain to the city about how you’re being exploited by York.

Ziad’s View

In a recent CBC news article, city councillor Howard Moscoe advised York University students that parking tickets issued on school property were likely illegal and the University did not have the power to issue such tickets. Mr. Moscoe stated that only the City of Toronto could issue tickets and as such, any tickets that were issued to students should not be paid. While Mr. Moscoe’s effort and crusade is admirable, there is an unfortunate truth that whether we, as York students, like it or not we must pay the tickets every time they are issued; if you choose not to, you could end up not receiving your transcripts or necessary paperwork to graduate at the end of your three or four year program.

Now I personally hate paying for parking tickets and even more, I hate paying for parking period. I think it is the biggest waste of money and there is nothing more annoying than having to pay ten dollars just to park your car for a few hours. But there is a matter of principle that both bloggers this week seem to agree upon; if you could afford the car, and the drive there, the insurance and the maintenance of said vehicle, than you probably could have managed to add a parking pass into the budget. That is right, parking pass, not paying per parking ticket, but actually buying a parking pass which would eliminate the headache of this whole situation.

Another important concern raised is how else do we propose should the University protect what is essentially private property. Warning tickets will do absolutely nothing, as we all know and it is virtually impossible to block and guard all the temporary parking zones on campus. Parking tickets are the only viable solution, at least in my mind, that allows the University to maintain some sort of order on campus.

In the end, the rules at York as of today, and probably tomorrow and after tomorrow, allow the University to issue parking tickets and control their private property; that does not mean that these rules will stay as such forever, but they are in place now and as such, follow the rules and if you can, take public transportation!

Filed under: GTA, Toronto   |  Leave a Comment

Does the GTA need another hockey team?

11Aug09

Ziad’s View

The recent attempt by billionaire Jim Balsillie to buy into the hockey market and bring a seventh team to Canada, in particular to the city of Hamilton, raises important questions about the future of hockey and the future of the sport in Canada. I simply cannot see why, other than the whole politics behind it, the NHL would refuse Mr. Balsillie’s bid to purchase the Phoenix Coyotes and fulfill a life-long dream of his. Many have argued that the Ontario market can support a third team (in addition to the Toronto Maple Leafs and the Ottawa Senators) and I personally support this view.

Another crucial issue is the hostility within Canada to a third Ontario team. While many may say that both Toronto and Ottawa (more the former than anything) do not have to worry about fan loyalty or funds, considering the huge corporate sponsors and the unwavering fan support, that does not and should not have anything to do with Mr. Balsillie’s bid to purchase a hockey team. Canada is home to some of the greatest hockey players ever; there is simply no arguing that. Moreover, the sport has served as a national pastime for many years and we need to consider the importance of adding a seventh Canadian hockey team to a predominantly American market. We need to stop thinking of this bid as a ‘Hamilton bid’, or an ‘Ontario bid’, and actually look at it as a Canadian bid; an attempt by a loyal, patriotic Canadian billionaire willing to expand the hungry Canadian hockey market and further the intensity of a truly wonderful support. Until this bid is shaped in this fashion, Mr. Balsillie may be out of luck.—Ziad

Sujoy’s View

There’s lots of solid reasons for Balsillie to bring another hockey team to Canada, and there is no question that another hockey team could be supported by the huge market present in southern Ontario. Why Hamilton is the front runner for receiving an NHL team is a bit perplexing however; an Ontario team hasn’t won the Stanley cup in 42 years. Is there complacency by players, or managers who know that no matter what, they have Canadian fans? What about fans in the rest of Canada? Why should Ontarians potentially have three teams when the prairies and BC have three between them? (Not to mention no teams in Atlantic Canada). Ontarians don’t seem to care whether their teams win or lose which is good news for business – it means that they can perform as poorly as they want, because what they have in place is a hockey culture that produces die-hard fans with unwavering loyalty.

The resistance that Balsillie is facing in bringing one team back across the border (at one time Hamilton did have an NHL team) shows just how much power is placed in the hands of corporate interests that against all reason, would rather place a team in Tampa Bay, Florida (pop. 332,888 according to the 2006 US Census). True, they are one of the older teams in the south, and do have a Stanley cup win to be proud of, but most would agree that the people who live, breath and actually watch hockey are in Canada and the north eastern US.

Clearly the owners are ignoring these facts and instead placing their own interests ahead of the interests of fans. This is a political move like any other – municipalities like Hamilton, would love to see a new industry bring revenue into the local economy. I’m sure that American owners, like their American commissioner would rather see that money going to American cities – an extension of ‘buy American’ perhaps?

The NHL insists on Americanizing the sport; a process which is aided further by predominantly American ownership of teams. Now, with what seems like a critical mass of small, unpopular trophy wife like teams in the southern US, the excitement of another Canadian team is ever growing as these southern teams like Phoneix continue to fail. We will have to wait and see if Balsillie can bring home another money making, game loosing, beloved team.

Filed under: GTA, Ontario   |  5 Comments
Tags: Balsillie, business, Hockey, Maple Leafs, Municipal politics

What’s with a name…?

07Aug09

Sujoy’s View

Next week, the NDP are getting ready to discuss pressing issues that have always been high on the political agenda for socialists – poverty, housing, social services, and… oh yes – what to call themselves?! One of the topics of debate is indeed whether or not the New Democratic Party should keep the “New” in its name. Did they not think of this 47 years ago when they changed from one 3 letter abbreviation (the CCF) to become the NDP, or were they uber-pessimists who honestly believed their party wouldn’t be around that long so that they could hold onto this new moniker? Personally, I don’t think they should change their name – becoming the Democratic Party (of Canada) presumably seems to be latching onto the current popularity of another, more renowned democratic party south of the border (it’s also more successful, more relevant, and more everything the NDP hopes to be).

The word new (in New Democrat) does not imply novelty, it’s more about new ideas, about being socially progressive – a party for new Canadians, new voters (presumably young people as well). New has nothing to do with how old the party is, New is a part of their mystique – but when you are the perennial last choice party, when you currently hold between zero and two seats in Alberta, New Brunswick, Newfoundland and Labrador, P.E.I. and the Yukon and when you get elected to provincial governments in Ontario and British Columbia where people in subsequent elections say NDP NEVER AGAIN, what you call yourself is probably the least of your worries.

Ziad’s View

With the upcoming NDP convention scheduled for August 14-16, an important question has arisen in that should the NDP change their name so that the ‘new’ is dropped from the party name. To answer this question one needs to consider how the NDP will attempt to not only change their name but, and more importantly, formulate a new method to package and promulgate the party’s message and values. If, and only if, this name change is to be accompanied by a sincere and coherent effort to rebrand the NDP into a new and viable party for the 21st century, than changing the name is necessary and quite appropriate. However, if the name change is to occur with no effort at understanding the deeper flaws within the party, the sometimes middle of the road approach and the lack of designated support for simple, principled issues that are important to the average Canadian (health care anyone? Tommy Douglas!), than a name change is useless and not worth the time or money.

The NDP must pursue this process only if it will mean a new approach to politics and the revival of an NDP that is vibrant, active and engaged. The NDP have always been Canada’s party of values and party of protest; whatever the issue at some point in history, the NDP has not been afraid to rally support, make some noise and bring to public awareness the severity or importance of said issue. As such, for the name changing process to be a success, I ask the NDP to re-examine their roots and discover the issues that are important to Canadians and that the NDP is willing to fight for day in and day out.

Filed under: political parties   |  8 Comments
Tags: CCF, NDP, New Democratic Party, Tommy Douglas