Loading...
Clinton News Record, 2014-08-06, Page 44 News Record • Wednesday, August 6, 2014 www.clintonnewsrecord.com NewsCl Record PUBLISHED WEEKLY — EST. 1860 53 Albert St. P.O. Box 39 Clinton ON NOM 1L0 (519) 482-3443 www.cl intonnewsrecord.com SUN MEDIA A Quebecor Media Company k, MARIE DAVID Sun Media Group Publisher Grey Bruce Huron Division 519-364-2001 or 519-372-4301 NEIL CLIFFORD Publisher nei I.clifford@sunmed ia.ca MAX BICKFORD Advertising Manager max.bickford@sunmedia.ca TARA OSTNER Reporter clinton.reporter@sunmedia.ca DAWN JOHNSTON Sales Representative clinton.ads@sunmedia.ca CHRISTY MAIR Front Office clinton.classifieds@sunmedia.ca SUBSCRIPTION RATES 1 YEAR $50.00 (47.62+2.38 GST) 2 YEAR $95.00 (90.48+4.52 GST) SENIORS 60WEEKS $50.00 (47.62+2.38 GST) 120 WEEKS $95.00 (90.48+4.52 GST) Advertising is accepted on the condition that in the event of a typographical error, the advertising space occupied by the erroneous item together with a reasonable allowance for signature, will not be charged but that balance of advertisement will be paid for at the applicable rate. In the event of a typographic error advertising goods or services ata wrong price, goods or services may not be sold. Ad- vertising is merely an offer to sell, and may be withdrawn at any time. The Clinton News -Record is not responsible for the loss or damage of unsolicited manuscripts, photos or other materials used for reproducing purposes. Publications Mail Agreement No.40064683 RETURN UNDELIVERABLE CANADIAN ADDRESSES: CIRCULATION DEPARTMENT 53 Albert St, Clinton ON NOM 1L0 (519)482-3443 We acknowledge the financial support of the Government of Canada through the Canadian Periodical Fund (CPE) for our publishing activities. Canada Member of the Canadian Community Cllr' . Newspaper Association and the Ontario Community Newspapers Association editorial Roll back costly communication staff Spare us the spin. Tell it to us straight. It'll save a few hundred million of our dollars in the process. Back in 2012, the Harper government revealed it was planning to trim more than 19,000 positions from the federal public service. Made sense to us. The count had been going up. The plan is a three-year process and is expected to save $5.2 billion. When announced, it was clear this would impact a number of departments. They were going to share the pain. In terms of raw dollars, the defence and pub- lic safety departments were expected to see the biggest hit. So it was reasonable to assume they'd take a fine-tooth comb to various job positions, no? They'd weed out which ones are more core duties, and providing front-line services, from those which really aren't all that necessary? Don't hold your breath. According to information obtained by the Canadian Taxpayers Federation (CTF), there's at least one role that hasn't seen the knife as much as it should have: information services staff. That means communication staffers, social media monitors, PR flacks, spin doctors, press people, media relations folk — you get the picture. There are 3,325 such staffers for the current fiscal year and taxpayers are shelling out $262.7 million for them. When Stephen Harper took office in 2006, there were 3,163. They hit a peak of 3,824 in 2010. A conservative -minded government truly focused on reducing bureaucracy should have reduced such positions, not increased them. But aside from the cost, there's also the gen- eral question of freedom of information. Journalists across the country, reporting on all levels of government, will tell you there was once a time you could call up a bureaucrat and get info from them directly. You didn't need to go through an information bureaucracy. Governments are moving to open source — they post expenses, meeting minutes and more online. Doesn't that then mean we can do with less comms staffers? We agree with CTF federal director Gregory Thomas' assessment: "The Harper government could save millions, simply by letting everyday federal government employees answer their tel- ephones, reply to e-mails, and respond with straight answers to straightforward questions from Canadians." That's a spin -free message all taxpayers must "communicate" to the government! column The costs of war Tara Ostner The Clinton News Record July 28 marked the anniversary of the first day of World War One. It was the day that Austria-Hungary declared war on Serbia and the ques- tionable peace between Europe's great powers collapsed. When I think about WW1 and WW2 I think about the concept of war and how people's opinion on the neces- sity and justification of it varies so greatly. At least part of the debate sur- rounding the justification of war rests on the question of whether the bene- fits resulting from war outweigh the costs. Theorists who attempt to defend the justification of war, namely, just war theorists, say that the benefits do outweigh the costs and opponents of war, namely, paci- fists, say that they don't. Then, in order to prove their respective points, the debate often turns into a discussion of history. For example, those who oppose warfare and believe it to be unjust often site WW1 as a good example of a war where the resulting benefits did not outweigh the costs. Over 15 million people lost their lives and in the end all that was established was an imperfect peace which ultimately set the stage for WW2. The futility, waste and complete human tragedy pro- duced by this war, they say, make it easy to see that the costs were much greater than any perceived benefit. At the same time, those who sup- port war and believe that it is at times justified often site WW2 as a good example of a war where the resulting benefits did outweigh the costs, even though the costs were horrific. By defeating Nazi Ger- many, they say, the world avoided the domination of a brutal and tyrannical militaristic regime. Just war theorists are also always very careful to point out that WW2, as dev- astating as it was, lead to the advancement of democracy, the crea- tion of the United Nations, the growth of international law and a respect for human rights. These four things, according to many, have made the world a better place and prove how the benefits of war can and do out- weigh the costs. While I can see where these just war theorists are coming from, I'm not sure that this gives us sufficient reason to claim that the act of war is justified. I say this because I feel somewhat uncomfortable claiming that the advancement of democracy, the creation of the UN, the growth of international law and a respect for human rights justify the killing of over 60 million people in WW2, many of whom, as we all know, were entirely innocent. I also wonder whether the positive outcomes of WW2 would have even- tually advanced naturally on their own, that is, without the war being fought. I am not a pacifist. I know that vio- lence is necessary especially in cases of self-defense. However, I am sym- pathetic towards some of the core tenants of pacifism. Take economic sanctions, for instance, an alternative to armed conflict that pacifists often advocate. Weapons might make a point but withholding resources (needed to attain such weapons in the first place, for example) could make a stronger one: countries won't get very far in their attack on another nation when strict barriers and restrictions are in place, and, in the end, I think that raging an economic war could be just as effective and likely less violent. Regardless of the exact extent of force that one believes is necessary and justified in times of conflict, I believe that when faced with interna- tional crises people too readily call for the use of force and the deploy- ment of troops. People also, I think, focus too closely on the best case out- comes of war. While indeed benefits can result from war we can never lose sight of the costs. And with the anniversary of the first day of the First World War having just passed, this bears particu- lar recognition. LETTERS TO THE EDITOR The News Record welcomes letters to the editor. All letters must be signed and include a daytime phone number for verification purposes. Letters can be sent care of the Internet at clinton.news@sunmedia.ca, sent via fax at 519-482-7341 or through Canada Post care dile Editor, P.O. Box 39, Clinton, ON NOL 1LO.