The Citizen, 2007-07-26, Page 5THE CITIZEN, THURSDAY, JULY 26, 2007. PAGE 5.
Bonnie
Gropp
TThhee sshhoorrtt ooff iitt
One sign Liberal Premier Dalton
McGuinty may be in trouble is the
way so many of his MPPs
unexpectedly are refusing to run for him again
in the Oct. 10 election.
Half a dozen Liberals so far have opted not
to run this time and they include two ministers,
a former minister and a backbencher who must
have been on the fringe of being considered
for such promotion.
Most have cited “personal” reasons for not
running, which is what ordinary citizens often
say when they are leaving jobs, want to remain
on good terms, collect their gold watches and
not reveal concerns.
Marie Bountrogianni, Minister of
Intergovernmental Affairs, says she wants to
spend more time with her husband and two
teenage children.
Mary Anne Chambers, Minister for Children
and Youth Services, says she has health
concerns that are forcing her to slow down.
Jennnifer Mossop, a former TV interviewer,
who might have been on the verge of getting in
cabinet because McGuinty desperately needs
ministers who know how to talk to the public,
says her musician husband, who has been
caring for their four-year-old daughter, has to
spend more time on tour.
Judy Marsales, who operates a real estate
brokerage, says she got tired of long hours at
the legislature and particularly night sittings
that are more boring than selling houses.
Richard Patten, the ex-minister but more
recently a backbencher, says he wants to make
a more worthwhile contribution to society than
being a backbencher, and there are many.
Ernie Parsons said a year ago he wanted to
leave after a son died, so he could spend more
time with his other children, and that has
to be accepted.
Some MPPs leave before every election,
particularly for age and varied reasons
including differences with their parties’
policies and direction.
Bountrogianni, for example, is nominally
the most successful, but intergovernmental
affairs ministers rarely have much power,
because decisions on how to deal with other
governments usually are made by premiers.
None of the departing MPPs is of normal
retirement age. Ministers who have put in an
effort to get in cabinet and have been in the job
only four years, with many goals still to
achieve, do not usually quit for more time with
family.
Most backbenchers have found night
sessions boring, but the legislature sits only
half the year and they usually can endure them
for more than four years.
One common denominator among the
dropouts is their party, after leading the polls
for almost four years, suddenly is in a tight
race in the election and in some danger of
losing government.
Liberal candidates suddenly are less sure of
winning seats or may wind up in opposition,
endlessly asking questions the government of
the day often refuses to answer when it feels
the truth would hurt it.
Politicians often lose their zest for running
when winning is uncertain and there have been
many demonstrations of this.
The most striking was in the 1980s, when
the Progressive Conservatives lost government
after 42 consecutive years during which
nominations to run for them were almost
equivalent to being elected and sought eagerly,
sometimes by those who previously supported
other parties.
The Conservative leader, Larry Grossman,
was already having difficulty attracting
candidates and admitted he was kept awake
nights worrying how he could raise enough
money to fight the 1987 election, which was
not heartening news to a party accustomed to
having more money to pay for election
propaganda than the other parties combined.
Many Conservatives who might have run,
including former senior ministers Bette
Stephenson, Dennis Timbrell, Bob Elgie and
“emperor of the north” Leo Bernier, found
they had reasons to stay home.
Voters noticed their absence and this helped
the Conservatives plunge to their lowest level
ever in the legislature.
The danger to McGuinty is that when his
ministers and MPPs refuse to run again it
suggests they lack confidence in him. Voters
cannot be expected to have confidence in a
premier when his party doesn’t.
Sink or swim
I’m thinking of branching out into a
different kind of writing. I want to write a
kids’ book.
Actually, a book just for male kids, to be
precise. I’ve already got the title. I’m going to
call it The Dangerous Book for Boys. It’ll be
full of detailed instructions that’ll show young
lads how to get involved with all kinds of
risky, possibly blood-spilling activities. Things
like building rafts…making slingshots….how
to construct a go-cart…how to skin a rabbit…
You think the Canadian public is ready for a
book like that?
Are you kidding me? Canadian publishers
aren’t ready for a book like that.
Number one, it’s sexist since it excludes half
the human race in its very title. Number two
it’s….well, it’s just entirely too dangerous, my
dears.
We live in an age when children are told not
to run during recess; when jungle gyms are
being removed from schoolyards to save our
little darlings from the ghastly trauma of
scrapes and bumps. Why, last year three
public school kids in Nova Scotia were
expelled because they showed up at their
school with snow on their jackets. Clear
evidence that they had been ‘rough-housing’in
a snowbank. We will have zero tolerance for
that kind of perilous nonsense, thank you very
much
A book like I’m proposing? Pah. I’d have
platoons of politically correct commandos on
my neck in a nanosecond. I’d be crucified,
tarred and feathered, drawn and quartered,
ridden out of town on a rail and
probably microwaved in effigy in the teachers’
lounge.
Only question would be: in what order.
Nope. Nobody in this country would touch a
book like that with barbecue tongs.
Which is a pity, because The Dangerous
Book for Boys got published in Britain last
year – and it’s a runaway bestseller.
And it really does tell boys how to skin
rabbits, build go-carts, make slingshots – and
much, much more.
It was written by two brothers, Con and Hal
Iggulden, with no encouragement whatsoever
from publishers and an equally frosty
shoulder from the British educational
community.
But the Iggulden brothers knew what kind of
a book they wanted to write – the kind of
instruction manual they would have killed to
get their hands on when they were young boys.
And the book’s a delight –even for those of
us well past our short-pants-and-brushcut
days.
Here for instance, is what the authors insist
“every boy should have to hand”:
Swiss Army Knife – to remove splinters
Handkerchief – doubles as a sling
Needle and thread – to sew up wounds, mend
torn shirt
Pencil and paper – to note down criminals’
license plates
Torch (flashlight) – to read secret plans at
night
A marble – a big one, for luck
Strange thing is, when I was a kid, I don’t
think The Dangerous Book for Boys would
have been such a hot seller. Why? Because we
actually did most of the things it recommends.
We made our own rafts and go-carts and
catapults and bows and arrows.
What happened?
Television happened. Packman and Super
Mario Brothers happened. YouTube and
MySpace happened. Political Correctness and
frivolous lawsuits happened.
Pity.
If I had to use one word to sum up the
Iggulden brothers’advice for boys it would be:
MOVE! Get involved. Be active. Get off your
pudgy, passive, pre-pubescent butts and DO
something.
“Play sport of some kind,” they write in The
Dangerous Book for Boys. “It doesn’t matter
what it is as long as it replaces the corpse-like
pallor of the computer programmer with a
ruddy glow.”
“You have to let kids take some risks,” says
Conn Iggulden. “If you don’t they’ll end up as
some dreadful, pallid things without any spirit
or courage.”
And even though the book is directed
exclusively at boys, it contains one chapter
devoted to that scariest of all young boy
challenges.
Girls.
“Treat girls with respect,” says the book.
“Remember they are as nervous around you as
you are around them – if you can imagine such
a thing.”
Wish somebody’d taught me that when I was
a boy. But then I wish I’d learned a lot of
things you find in this book – five
important knots…how to use your wristwatch
as a compass…how to make invisible
ink…
The magic ingredient for that last one?
Urine.
Don’t worry, ladies….it’s a boy thing.
Arthur
Black
Many Liberals opting out
Like flickering fireflies the sun dances
tiny pinpricks of light off the glassy
surface. A swimmer slices through the
water with sleek precision barely raising a
ripple. Stroking, gliding, floating, a gentle
power in a weightless world.
A good swimmer is a beautiful thing to
watch. And let me just say that I don’t get a lot
of spectators. I am self-taught, limited in my
ability and wary in the extreme. I really don’t
have much technique, strength or skill.
However, like good, or smart, swimmers, I
have a healthy respect for the water.
Approaching it any other way is nothing short
of foolhardy. No matter how confident, no
matter what one’s ability the swimmer will be
the one tested. Water has nothing to prove and
it will never lose.
It has been a big regret that the opportunity
to learn to swim properly wasn’t there for me.
First, it’s a beautiful sport. Those who do it
well, look good doing it. I have seen it turn the
most awkward of children into a creature of
grace.
But more importantly, I believe it’s
something everyone should know how to do.
And I certainly didn’t give my kids much of a
choice. Sometimes, as a parent, the struggle’s
not worth the victory. However, my eldest,
who spent two summer sessions sitting on the
edge of the pool finally recognized I wasn’t
giving in on this one and decided to jump in.
The rest of my kids were easier. The
youngest went as far as he could without
turning it into a summer job while his two
sisters spent summers lifeguarding and
teaching others to swim.
Now my grandson, after much cajoling and
coaxing has finally discovered the fun in a
good soaking and of all the things he’s
accomplished to make me happy, this is the
biggest. Every child should know how to
swim.
First there’s the safety issue. There’s no
guarantee, of course, even in learning to swim.
Children who know how to swim can still
drown just a few feet from safety because of
confusion or fear, and there is a danger with
older kids that they exaggerate their skills and
can find themselves in serious deep water.
But prevention and protection starts with
education. When swimming is the issue
,ignorance is not bliss.
Situations occur that can be out of a person’s
control. It’s not hard to imagine, for example,
a pool party where some over-exuberance
results in a non-swimmer falling or being
pushed into a pool and enthusiastic revellers
being unaware that anyone is in trouble.
But also, not many physical activities are as
good for you or as much fun. Swimming is an
exercise that can be continued throughout your
life. It’s good cardio with low stress on the
body. It builds endurance, strengthening your
heart and lungs. It can be used to cross-train,
alternating swimming with land exercises.
Before you run or do aerobics, swimming can
be a gentle warmup. Or after a good workout
on land, swimming a few laps can be a great
way to cool down and relax
Swimming burns calories, about three a mile
for each pound of your body weight.
It can be a restorative exercise allowing you
to relax your mind and focus on your strokes
as you glide through the water.
Safety and health. Two very good reasons
why everyone should learn to swim. Throw in
a heat wave and it’s as clear as a northern
Ontario lake there can be no argument on this
one.
Other Views The art of living dangerously…
Eric
Dowd
FFrroomm
QQuueeeenn’’ss PPaarrkk
“The person who says it can’t be done
should not interrupt the person doing it.”
– Chinese proverb
Final Thought