Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutThe Citizen, 2019-08-29, Page 5Other Views Reflecting on tornadoes and toddlers Don’t take democracy for granted Shawn Loughlin Shawn’s Sense While I do bemoan a lot of what social media has done to society, from nonsensical abbreviations to the self-focused, participation ribbon-winning generation it’s creating, there are some good things about it, like Facebook’s “Memories”. The Memories feature, for those of you who have evaded Facebook’s siren call, shows what you posted the same day every year. So when I looked back on Aug. 21, the day my daughter was born three years ago, I saw all the birthday comments and celebrations. Then I scrolled a bit further and saw something else: the F3 tornado that tore through one of my hometowns of Goderich, as well as its surrounding communities and countryside. Now, after discussing this column idea with some coworkers, I came to the conclusion that my best bet would be to say early on that I’m not trying to diminish anything that anyone experienced during that tornado. I know people who were hurt, and I’m related to people who lost a lot when that tornado rolled through. I count my blessings all the time regarding what could have been lost, but wasn’t that day. That said, I’ll admit that in my matter-of- fact mind, the first thing that popped up was that Mary Jane was born five years to the day after that tornado rolled through Goderich and I couldn’t help but draw some parallels. Mary Jane is a wonderful child. She’s typically happy, energetic, excited to be outside and always ready to offer a hug. When people ask when Ashleigh and I are going to have a second, my routine response is that we hit a homerun with Mary Jane, so why even go back to bat again? However whenever any child, no matter how perfect, rolls into a home, they have a tornado- like impact. You’re left wondering where your stuff went, whose stuff replaced it, and how much this is all going to cost you. Don’t believe me? Just look at my media room. Oh wait, it no longer exists. Before Mary Jane came along, the room that was hers had a 70-inch screen for my projector and a super comfortable futon. It was perfect for cuddling up and watching movies. In place of it are dresses, a tickle trunk, a bed filled with stuffed animals and fluffy, forest animal-inspired decor. It’s like something blew away everything that and left someone else’s stuff there, kind of like a tornado. The same can be said for nearly every room in our house. The pantry, which used to be filled with spices and seasonings, taco shells and all kinds of unique ingredients for my culinary experiments is now filled with Ritz crackers, cookies and apple sauce pouches. My workshop is now filled with boxes of clothes and toys that Mary Jane has outgrown and, instead of woodworking, I spend most of my time in that part of the house fixing toys, replacing batteries and mending books. The mud room is now home to all manner of bubble-producing apparatuses and at least one stroller, the dining room has more bibs than scotch glasses, and even our bedroom now has a dedicated spot to hide gifts for future birthdays or Christmases. Oh, and don’t even get me started on the bathroom: rubber duckies, mermaid dolls, oatmeal soaps, no-tangle hair spray, no-tangle shampoo and a stepping stool that I constantly stub my toe on when I’m half asleep. There’s also the shed, which I swear I’ll be finishing before the snow falls this year. It was originally supposed to be a place to store and work on my snowblower and lawn mower. Now, it’s also home to all manner of outdoor play equipment. There’s also the finances to consider. Sure, the tornado did hundreds of millions of dollars in damages, which simply isn’t comparable to any amount of money that we’re likely to spend on Mary Jane in my lifetime, but that doesn’t mean that children aren’t expensive. There seems to be an agreed-upon average cost of between $14,000 and $23,000 per year to raise a child, depending on a family’s activities. Plot that out for 21 years (because who really moves out at 18 anymore) and a parent is looking at, on average, between $300,000 and $500,000 to raise a child to the age of 21 and that is a good chunk of money. And that’s not even taking into account college, university or trade school! Like I said, I’m not aiming to diminish anyone’s experiences here: the tornado was a very real and deadly natural disaster that rolled through Huron County. My weird, bottom-line mind, however, can’t help but notice that, five years to the day after Goderich faced that whirling dervish, Ashleigh and I had our own. All of what I said above may seem like griping, but in all honesty, anyone who has seen me bring Mary Jane out to take a photo, or run into us while walking the beautiful streets of Blyth knows that each and every trade-off I listed, plus millions more, are worth it. I’d give up every ounce of personal space in my house for the family I have and do so with a smile on my face. That doesn’t mean, however, I can’t see the comedy in the coincidence of Mary Jane being born Aug. 21. Denny Scott Denny’s Den THE CITIZEN, THURSDAY, AUGUST 29, 2019. PAGE 5. Nothing to hide Right now, Premier Doug Ford is using taxpayer money to fund a lawsuit aimed at keeping his dirty laundry hidden. The province is going to court to fight an order from its privacy commissioner, which ordered the release of Ford’s mandate letters, which should be public, to his ministers. At least his promise to increase transparency lasted for a solid week or two after he spent a year setting up his friends with plush, six- figure jobs – again, our tax dollars at work. At the heart of this though (and really the Fords in general – remember how Rob definitely didn’t smoke crack?) is the age-old question that wonders aloud why, if you have nothing to hide, would you fear investigation? It was disgraced U.S. President Richard Nixon, when Watergate allegations began to swirl, who said he welcomed scrutiny because he had nothing hide. “I welcome this kind of examination because people have got to know whether or not their president is a crook. Well, I’m not a crook.” We would later find out that Nixon had a lot to lose and that he was, indeed, a crook. In this press conference, however, he said the right things. He said he welcomed investigation by ethics commissioners, the media and the public because he’d done nothing wrong. Ford, however, is fresh off of his pledge for transparency and his arrogant, third-person statement that “no one can buy Doug Ford”, which, it appears, couldn’t be further from the truth and now throws this in the pan. He’s using our tax dollars to keep things from us. If he has nothing to hide, he should be free of worry, but that doesn’t seem to be the case. Prime Minister Justin Trudeau is embroiled in his own scandal. No doubt everyone has heard that he acted inappropriately in working to influence then-Attorney General Jody Wilson-Raybould in the case of SNC-Lavalin. Another age-old law enforcement saying is that the cover-up is always worse than the crime. Not only has Trudeau been dishonest and not exactly forthcoming with the true story of what happened between him, Wilson- Raybould and SNC-Lavalin, but he is actively working to suppress details. The House of Commons ethics committee, with a Liberal majority, has blocked an effort to have Ethics Commissioner Mario Dion testify to his report about Trudeau and the SNC-Lavalin incident. Again, if Trudeau and his government have nothing to hide, he should welcome this opportunity to clear the air, especially with a critical election looming. I don’t have to tell you that U.S. President Donald Trump has become the poster boy for this behaviour. While he can repeat “no collusion, no obstruction” as many times as he’d like (and he has), his government has bucked any attempt at transparency. And yet, he assures supporters he has nothing to hide. To mine some wisdom from the bottomless wisdom barrel that is Judge Judy – for those of us unoccupied during the day watching her adjudicate countless asinine conflicts between neighbours or roommates– if you tell the truth, you don’t have to have a good memory. Last week, The Economist published a piece entitled “The global gag on free speech is tightening” and while North Americans may associate a lack of free speech with far-flung dictatorships on the other side of the world, ethics investigations are being shut down and media access is being limited right here at home. While it’s scary for a journalist, everyone should be taking note and keeping tabs on this very disturbing road map and where exactly it might take us. There have been times over the past few weeks, as the TV news was full of video of protests in Hong Kong, when I wished people would just give it up and go home. But then I realize what they’re fighting to maintain. Day after day, week after week, Hong Kong residents have taken to the streets to fight back against attempts by Chinese government authorities to integrate the population of the former British colony into mainland China, shortcutting the guarantees it made to maintain democracy and other liberties for 50 years following the handover by Britain in 1997. At times estimates have put the number of protesters in the streets at two million people out of a population of five million. They protest, although they realize they might be attacked by police and, if China gets its way about Hong Kong citizens who are arrested being sent to the mainland for “justice”, they might suffer reprisals. I have to ask myself, could you get 40 per cent of the Canadian population risking their safety in the streets to fight for democracy? I suspect we couldn’t. Often we have only slightly more than that number bothering to make the effort to vote in our elections, let alone march in the streets. Elsewhere, people seem to care so little of their rights to participate in a democracy that they have elected leaders who are anti- democratic. Enough Italians voted for Matteo Salvini, a right-wing hardliner, that he became Deputy Prime Minister in a coalition government. He recently brought down the coalition by withdrawing his party’s support and some think he has designs on becoming Prime Minister. Elsewhere, people in Hungary have voted in Victor Orban; people in Philippines elected Rodrigo Roa Duterte as President; and Brazilians elected Jair Bolsonaro. None of these men could be described as democrats. And then there’s Vladimir Putin in Russia, who was elected in supposedly democratic elections but has turned Russia into a virtual dictatorship. It’s perhaps understandable that Russians and Hungarians, who grew up in Communist dictatorships then had a few years of democracy, might not appreciate the precious gifts they were giving away when they turned to strongmen to run their countries. They’d been brainwashed for decades into thinking that some leaders were just smarter than ordinary citizens were and more entitled to lead. In countries like Canada, we take it for granted that the natural progression toward social justice is toward a point when the people decide who will form the government, but such a belief isn’t always so self-evident. Indeed, it hasn’t always been a core belief even here. Recently I’ve plunged myself into researching the 1837 Rebellion here in Ontario. That rebellion is often treated as a farce, but what leaders like William Lyon Mackenzie and Col. Anthony Van Egmond were fighting against is a vision of a colony we can hardly recognize. Questioned by Mackenzie before a committee of the Legislative Council of Upper Canada, (as Ontario was then called), Bishop John Strachan, unofficial leader of the “Family Compact” of prominent families who felt they should run the colony, ridiculed the idea of a public vote. “Nobody,” he maintained, “would ask for vote by ballot but from gross ignorance; it is the most corrupt way of using the franchise.” The colony’s governor, Sir Francis Bond Head, maintained that the idea he was responsible to the people was unconstitutional. He saw it as his mission to fight “low-bred, antagonist(ic) democracy”. He felt no obligation to take the advice of the elected Assembly, seeing these people as republicans and traitors. It was only the open, failed rebellion of Mackenzie and a few hundred volunteers, along with another rebellion in Lower Canada (Quebec, today) that got the attention of the British government. Lord Durham’s report on the rebellions’ causes set Canada on the road to democracy. Similar feelings as those expressed by Strachan and Bond Head that the people are too stupid to run the country, have led to the growth of dictatorships today. Even in our neighbours to the south, it’s hard to think that President Donald Trump, who sees himself as smarter than everyone else around him, really believes that the people who elected him are wise enough to control his future. It would be interesting to see what would happen with his base supporters if his true feelings became public. We have a federal election coming up in October. You might be tempted to turn off your radio and TV and stop reading newspapers to escape politics. You might not even vote. Just remember how hard people in Hong Kong are fighting to maintain what you take for granted. Keith Roulston From the cluttered desk