Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutThe Citizen, 2007-07-05, Page 5THE CITIZEN, THURSDAY, JULY 5, 2007. PAGE 5. Bonnie Gropp TThhee sshhoorrtt ooff iitt Ontario has hung a portrait of another former premier in a legislature corridor where few will see it, but is not doing much otherwise to remember those who served in its top job. One reason is politics have grown more bitter and confrontational and most premiers of the last two decades have had little enthusiasm for honouring those who went before them. The latest portrait unveiled was of Mike Harris, Progressive Conservative premier from 1995-2002, who went three-quarters of the way to meet any fight and never made friends in other parties. Premiers until the 1980s traditionally named buildings and other centres after those who preceded them. The legislature complex at Queen’s Park includes the Macdonald, Whitney, Hearst, Ferguson, Hepburn, Mowat, Drew and Frost Buildings. When Conservative premier Leslie Frost retired in 1961, the province also put his name on a 24,000 acre wilderness area and natural resources centre used to train foresters and schoolchildren. After John Robarts, another Conservative, left, the province financed construction of a medical research institute in London, his home city, which won international stature for research on major illnesses. It also helped build the Robarts school for the hearing impaired in the same city, the massive, fortress-like Robarts Library in Toronto, about which he commented good- humouredly “It’s the ugliest building in the city and it has my name on it” and a Robarts Centre for Canadian studies. When William Davis, also a Tory, retired, the province named a computer research centre in Waterloo and courthouse at Brampton, his hometown, jointly after him and his father, a local lawyer, because Davis refused to allow his name to be used unless his father’s was included. Davis also has several schools named after him and provincial employees set up a fund in his name to finance scholarships for their children. There also was a move to name the domed sports stadium in Toronto after Davis, but it fell through when owners of stadiums in the United States said names had to be luring, like the Silverdome and Astrodome, and politicians’ names do not attract. Since then the tradition of naming bricks and mortar after former premiers has faded. Conservative Frank Miller, premier only a few months, had a scenic highway route near his home in Muskoka re-named after him, but that was by the regional government. David Peterson, who succeeded him as Liberal premier, spoke enthusiastically for honouring ex-premiers by naming facilities after them. Helping open a centre named after Robarts, he called him “one of my old heroes” and urged the domed stadium be named after Davis because he was “Ontario’s greatest fan and booster of sports.” But none of the four premiers who followed Peterson has suggested naming anything after him and he told this writer with a rueful smile the best he might hope for is they would name an outhouse after him. New Democrat Bob Rae, who succeeded Peterson, once said he knew the Liberal before they opposed each other in politics and felt he was superficial and lazy and this started a decades-long feud between them. Peterson got some of his own back as recently as last year, when he helped block Rae from winning the federal Liberal leadership. Extreme right winger Harris, who succeeded Rae, had no time for the New Democrat and his bigger government and probably would have been happier demolishing a building in his memory. Liberal premier Dalton McGuinty is equally cool to Harris, who ran election ads picturing him as if in a police mug shot and dismissing him as “not up to the job.” McGuinty is trying to keep Harris’s name alive, but mainly by constantly recalling he slashed and weakened services in the hope this will help the Liberals win votes in the Oct. 10 election. Depriving former premiers of the right to have real estate named after them is no great hardship compared to what others are enduring, but it shows politics are growing more personal and petty. O’ Canada T he cure for materialism is to have enough for everybody and to spare. When people are sure of having what they need they cease to think about it. – Henry Ford Henry Ford couldn’t have been more wrong. But then he died in 1947, long before rampant consumerism became a certified North American blood sport. Ford didn’t live to see $300 sunglasses, $600 designer jeans, or a society so bloated and celebrity-starved that an airhead like Paris Hilton can charge – and get -- $20,000 just for ‘showing up’ at your cocktail party. Wretched excess is all around us. Consider the wristwatch. I could pop into the Bay and pick up a Timex for 20 or 30 bucks that would probably outlive me. If I really wasn’t fussy, I could find a no- name knock-off at a kiosk in the mall for about half that price. Or I could opt for the 2007 TAG Heuer SLR wristwatch. It’s mine for a mere $4,995. But I’d have to hurry. It’s a limited edition wristwatch. They’re only making 3,500 of them all told, and of those, only 65 are slated to be sold in Canada. A spokesperson for the company smugly announced that most of them have already been ‘pre-sold’. Hey, it’s ‘way cheaper than the watch Tag Heuer put out in 2,004. That one cost $525,725. Really. Mind you, they threw in a Mercedes-Benz convertible. As a matter of fact, it was a Mercedes-Benz promotional stunt. You had to buy the car to get the watch. Incredibly, people did. Jo Ann Caza, public relations manager for Mercedes-Benz Canada explained to a Financial Post reporter that “Customers loved the exclusivity of it.” But this new Tag Heuer watch is different. Customers don’t have to pony up a half mil up front for a car. They’d even sell one to a pedestrian plebe like me if I moved fast enough. You think anybody’s stupid enough to lay out five grand for a wristwatch? You better believe it. Tag Heuer put out their first open- to-the-proles SLR wristwatch in 2005 and slapped a $5,000 price tag on it. The entire run sold out in a matter of weeks. A senior manager for the Swiss watch company says more and more customers are demanding high end watches. “Men used to buy watches to match their suits,” explained a senior brand manager, “but now they buy the watch first and dress to accessorize it.” Shows how far behind the fashion curve I am. I have never entertained the notion of matching what’s on my wrist to what’s on my back. Hell, I’ve only got one watch. Come to think of it, I’ve only got one suit – and even it’s a little baggy at the knees. Speaking of bags – more wretched excess. Last week in this space I mentioned that simple canvas tote bags ain’t so simple anymore. Big name fashion houses such as Castiglioni and Hermes are putting out simple bags – two handles, no pockets – but with the firm’s logo prominently displayed. The Castiglioni bag will cost you over 800 bucks. The Hermes is a steal at $960. But an alert reader put me on to the stylish little number that the folks at Prada are putting on the market. Their designers have managed to combine two unlikely commodities: high fashion and the War on Terror. You know that latest wrinkle in airport security where the wand drones demand that all liquids and gels – dangerous goods like toothpaste, mouthwash, mascara et al. – be placed in clear plastic bags for scrutinizing? Prada’s way ahead of them. Their newest tote comes with big red handles. The rest of it is transparent plastic. Call it Paranoia Chic. But that’s not the best news. The best news is, if you act right now, the Prada bag will only cost you $1,120 U.S. Jim Wallis said it better than I can. In his book The Soul of Politics, he wrote: “Material consumption – buying and possessing things – has become the primary way of belonging in America and around the world. If we can’t buy, if we can’t consume, we simply can’t belong.” When Henry Ford unveiled his first Model T almost a hundred years ago, a newspaper reporter asked him what colours the car came in. Ford replied: “You can have any colour you like as long as it is black.” Ah, Henry. Where are you when we need you? Arthur Black Ontario premiers not honoured O’ Canada, our home and native land.’ And how blessed I feel about that. This past weekend we celebrated our country’s 140th birthday. It comes at a time when we find our armed forces fighting for peace on the other side of the world, when our environment is in danger, when we view our country’s leaders with cynicism, when our Native people are frustrated and the relationship between French and English- speaking Canada balances precariously on the edge of separatism. Yet, few would argue that we live in the greatest country in the world. We still enjoy a level of international respect. We have freedoms and rights that protect and sustain us. We are rich, perhaps not as much as before, but still undeniably wealthy, in natural resources. It is a land of harvest, culture, education and opportunities. Granted our neighbours to the south often view us as their inferior cousin. But recently, on a radio station, I heard a segment by the late comic Red Skelton. During a visit here in 1990, he talked about hearing people sing the national anthem. Some he said appeared apathetic and wondered if it was perhaps they didn’t really understand the meaning of the words and offered a translation. Listening, I was quite moved, not just by the meaning put to the words, but that they were delivered by a visitor to our country. Skelton saw all that we had to offer and too often take for granted. He spoke of the mountains, lakes and trees, saying that Canada is truly “Mother Nature’s warehouse.” He saw the quality of life, the riches that exist for us here. His “translation” refers to a country of rich soil that provides those who live here not just with its bounty, but with amazing beauty. It is too, he says, a place where families live with dignity. He recognized our sense of pride and justice. People here are able to live their lives as they choose, not fearful that retribution may come as the result of any of the choices they make. However, Canadians are equally sensitive to other’s views, not flaunting power, but knowing that it exists should it be necessary. He saw in Canada a people of quiet strength and easy-going attitude. “O’ Canada, glorious and free!” he explains as a place that is just in its treatment of people. Skelton spoke of Canadian warmth and wisdom, of inspiration and courage, of finding a dream and making it come true. Canada was then and remains a dream come true. Driving to work the other day, hearing Skelton’s version of our national anthem, while surrounded by open spaces coloured emerald and gold, canopied by a sky of brilliant blue, raised such an intense feeling of well-being. I’ve joked many times that I must have done something right in another life to have been fortunate enough to be re-born in this blessed corner of the Earth. Nothing could have proven that point more than that moment in time. So if you didn’t give your country, and your good fortune in living here, proper consideration on Canada Day take the time now. Forget what’s wrong and count your blessings. Focus on this country’s majesty, its awe-inspiring beauty, its grace and charm From Atlantic to Pacific, Canada has it all and I for one never forget how lucky I am to be part of that. Other Views Oh, such wretched excess Eric Dowd FFrroomm QQuueeeenn’’ss PPaarrkk Letters Policy The Citizen welcomes letters to the editor. Letters must be signed and should include a daytime telephone number for the purpose of verification only. Letters that are not signed will not be printed. Submissions may be edited for length, clarity and content, using fair comment as our guideline. The Citizen reserves the right to refuse any letter on the basis of unfair bias, prejudice or inaccurate information. As well, letters can only be printed as space allows. Please keep your letters brief and concise.