Home Blog Page 1306

Conservatives introduce 2013 budget, Canada Job Grants

By
EIC
-
0

The budget raised concerns that student issues aren’t being addressed

By Jane Lytvynenko

OTTAWA (CUP) — Finance Minister Jim Flaherty announced Economic Action Plan 2013 on March 21, titled “Jobs, Growth, and Economic Prosperity.” The budget introduces market-oriented skills training, job creation measures and aims to balance the books by 2015. However, the opposition is not optimistic that the Tories can keep these promises.

“These predictions are wrong,” said Thomas Mulcair, leader of the New Democratic Party. “That’s what we’ve constantly seen.”

Bob Rae, interim-leader of the Liberal Party of Canada, also disliked the budget, calling it “the same old propaganda.”
“It has very unlikely targets as to where the revenue picture is going to go over the next couple of years,” said Rae. “It’s a rhetorical document, it’s an excursive of political relic.”

One of the main features of the budget is the Canada Jobs Grant. The program would provide job seekers with $5,000 for skills training, which the federal government hopes would be matched by an additional $10,000 from provincial governments and employers.

The grant would create opportunities for apprentices and provide support to underrepresented groups, such as youth and aboriginals, to help them find employment.

However, Rae said the government could do more for the unemployed Canadians.

“ There’s no new money, it’s money that’s going to be delayed for several years, it’s money that now requires an equal amount from provinces and employers,” he said. “It’s actually a whole lot less when you consider the size and extent of employment.”

Businesses who can provide skills training — such as community and career colleges — will be eligible to receive up to $5,000 dollars per person of that grant. The businesses’ and provinces’ contributions will have to match the federal government. The program will be finalized after renewal negotiations of the Labour Market Development Agreements in 2014–15 with the provinces and territories.

Flaherty said he can’t guarantee all provinces will sign off on the grant, but remains optimistic about the plan.

“[ The Conservatives] listen to businesses and persons who are unemployed,” said Flaherty. “We have a problem and we have to fix it. I think the provincial governments will listen to… employers.”
Adam Awad, chairperson of the Canadian Federation of Students, said while the grant is a step in the right direction it’s not enough for students. He was disappointed with the budget and felt that the government could do more to address the student issues.

“It’s definitely disappointing; it doesn’t do much for students at all,” said Awad. “It doesn’t address the main issues of debt and access to education.”

“Canadian businesses are… failing to provide this training regardless; it’s not the government’s responsibility to pay businesses to do their own job. It would have been much better to provide that funding directly into the education system.”

In addition to the Canada Jobs Grant, the government announced promotion of education in science, technology, engineering, mathematics and skilled trades, all of which are considered high-demand.

As a part of the grant, $19 million over two years will be reallocated to informing youth about those fields of study and the career opportunities stemming from them. The budget does not provide details of where the funding will be reallocated from.

A total of $70 million over three years will be invested in
5,000 paid internships for recent post-secondary graduates. They will be added on to the 3,000 internships already created with Economic Action plan 2012.

The Canadian Youth Business foundation will receive
$18 million over two years if the foundation can raise $15 million to match the federal funding. The non-profit organization works with young entrepreneurs develop their business by providing mentorship, advice and other resources. The government hopes this will help the foundation become self-sustainable.

Awad said the funds to help youth gain employment are not “addressing the main concern.” The government has also
allocated money for research which will involve undergraduate students. Research funding will see $37 million per year to support partnerships with industr y through the granting councils, including an additional $12 million annually for the College and Community Innovation program (CCIP). The CCIP supports collaboration between colleges and industry on research projects.

The granting councils will expand eligibility for their undergraduate and industrial internships and scholarships to students who are enrolled in college bachelor programs.

Awad added that the primary issue is student debt, as student are “unable to take risks” once they graduate because of the money they owe.

“While the money for the apprenticeship programs and grants are better than nothing, its nowhere near what needs to happen,” said Awad.

MBA students pinch pennies for Science World

By
EIC
-
0

WEB-pennies-Leah Bjornson

Science World’s latest exhibit celebrates the life of the Canadian copper

By Leah Bjornson

For the past few weeks, SFU Master of Business Administration (MBA) students have engaged youth and community members alike at their “Penny Tributes” exhibit, now on display at Science World, or Telus World of Science.

The exhibit, which focuses on the penny and its demise, was created after Beedie School of Business’s Management of Technology students were challenged to create a promotional campaign as part of a projectmanagement course. The team — made up of Patrick Altejos, Alex Popov, Scott Brundrett, and James Cameron — felt that the decision to work with Science World was a natural extension of their venture.

“It just clicked,” said Cameron. “The phaseout is an important time for the penny and the idea happened to be going through both our minds and the minds of the executive team at Science World. When we did speak, there was a good fit and it was easy for us to go forward with them.”

Canada’s phasing out of the penny began this year after the federal government announced its decision to remove the coin due to its excessive cost of its production relative to face value. It is estimated that taxpayers will save up to $11 million a year with the penny gone. The environmental implications of the continued production of the coin also prompted the government to make the decision.

Pennies are three per cent copper, 97 per cent zinc, and are primarily made from virgin ore. Because they are made from materials that can only be obtained through mining, penny minting results in heavy-metal and lead rich mining tailings, which pollute the environment.

Even after the metals are mined, the environmental impact does not stop. The process of refining zinc and copper can release toxins like sulfur dioxide, lead and zinc into the environment.
All of this information can be found at the Penny Tributes exhibit at Science World, placed just inside the entrance. The MBA students’ display takes the attendee on a journey that follows the penny’s life from creation, to circulation, to eventual phase-out.

“We have an open pit mine display, penny collections, penny games, and experiments and demonstrations designed by SFU science instructors and 4D Labs that are orchestrated by Science World,” said Cameron.
The exhibit is meant to engage and educate the visitors of Science World, while encouraging them to donate their nowobsolete pennies. Such a partnership was perfect for Science World, which as a non-profit organization needs the community’s support to continue its operations.

“When you donate to Science World, you invest in BC’s future,” reads the Science World website. “By making science fun, we spark curiosity and open the doors to the wonders and possibilities of science and technology.”

The vice president of development at Science World, Jennifer Ingham, has been working with the SFU students since the beginning of their project two months ago. Ingham spoke to the importance of this project for Science World.

“Not everyone knows that Science World is a charity,” said Ingham. “We need support from the public so that we can continue to educate the community and encourage students to pursue the sciences, a field which some students tend to avoid.”

Although the penny will soon be gone from circulation, the SFU MBA students are making sure that its history will not be forgotten. “We’re working on a model of Science World to be used as a legacy piece, where coins would activate the lights in the dome making it fun for people to donate,” said Cameron. “Our other coin depository will stay on the site for some time to come.”

When asked how she enjoyed working the SFU students, Ingham smiled and responded warmly. The SFU team is in discussion on Science World’s behalf about possible future projects with Greentech Exchange, CoinMart, and SFU’s own 4D LABS and Faculty of Science, so though this is the first collaboration with a university program, it may not be the last.

SFU’s Relay for Life raises over $32,000

By
EIC
-
0

The fifth annual event drew 200 plus participants

By Kelli Gustafson

Simon Fraser University’s fifth annual Relay for Life fundraiser was held the weekend before last and raised over $32,000, beating last year’s total by an estimated $5,000. Relay for Life is one of the largest fundraising events held across Canada for the Canadian Cancer Society, and offers funds for cancer research, prevention, and support.

Beginning at 7:00 p.m. on March 22 at SFU’s West Gym, over 200 participants formed teams to relay together for the 12-hour long event. The Relay for Life event consists of relay teams taking turns to walk or run around a track for 12 to 24 hours (depending on the event), while raising funds for the Canadian Cancer Society.

In the past, Relay for Life has been the largest event held by SFU Residence, and this year marked the first time it was ran by an SFU club. With the assistance from LEAD students, a dedicated planning committee, and countless volunteers, the event was considered a huge success by all those involved.

The event also hosts a luminary ceremony in order to celebrate and remember those who have survived or been lost to cancer. During the ceremony, which is held during the relay, candles are lit and placed in special paper bags which each bear the name of a cancer survivor or victim.

“I actually was very touched by the luminary ceremony,” said Elina Avramova, SFU LEAD (Certificate in Innovation Leadership) student and Relay for Life participant.

Avramova described how a few laps around the track were made in complete silence during the ceremony; “It was very powerful.”
David Markus, another SFU LEAD student, agreed that the Luminary Ceremony demonstrated harmony. “It was clear during the Luminary Ceremony, and throughout the event, that everyone had a personal bond that motivated them to do such an outstanding job at fundraising.”

Markus and Avramova , along with other fellow LEAD
students, assisted the planning committee with this event by promoting Relay for Life to the SFU community. Promotions included the “Relay for Life Superhero Pub Night,” held last month at the Highland Pub. All proceeds from tickets that night were donated directly to the Canadian Cancer Society.

“I am really happy that for my LEAD project I had the opportunity to work with such a great organization,” Avramova stated.
In 2012, over $51 million was raised across Canada by Relay for Life events for the Canadian Cancer Society. Vancouver’s Relay for Life is still on the horizon, and will be held on June 22 at Killarney Park.

Putting the men in feminism

By
EIC
-
3

OPS - Ed Cartoon April 1 2013-BenBuckley

By Bryan Scott
Illustration By Ben Buckley

When I consider taking on a complex task, I try to find simple solutions that may lead to an ultimate answer to the problem. Feminism is a hot topic and I feel like more men are getting in line with equal rights. I am by no means an expert on feminism, nor do I know what it is like to be a woman, but that doesn’t mean I can’t help.

As a man, its easy to forget that women have a rough go in many aspects of life that we might not think twice about. For instance, I do a lovely walk from Terminal to Main and Hastings at 3:00 a.m. regularly after work. It is a little sketchy, but I don’t feel at risk. For all of the women I work with, this isn’t a perceived option.
Feminism deals with the complex social issues that arise through the struggle for gender equality. To resolve these issues, we need not look past men, as some feminists do.

In my experience, the majority of feminists I’ve encountered acknowledge that I am a man who can be a friend in the fight and not a de facto foe. My issue lies with the feminists who claim to be open-minded and yet hold back progress by refusing to view men as equal players in the fight for equality.

Based on history as an ex-college lacrosse player, I can understand the skepticism over me as an ally. But making assumptions based on my gender and pass-time activities is no better than telling a girl in a short skirt she’s asking for it.

Recently, I went to a meeting that was discussing women’s issues at a student press conference. One young woman publically called me out, asking what I was doing at the meeting as if I were an enemy infiltrator — they didn’t need some stinkin’ man to help them nor could I benefit from the meeting, which was a real kick in the balls. I wanted to gain more knowledge of the problems that my female journopeers face, but found myself regretting going after her reaction.

There is no reason a man can’t be feminist. Everyone can be an asshole. Most men love and respect women and want what is the best for them, as defined by women.

We are a social species, and there tends to be a cascade of follow-the-leader when things are normalized. So why not accept the help of the “enemy” and find a solution together? Last time I checked, women’s issues were everyone’s issues so lets drop the fences a bit, and get rid of this archaic way of thinking.

If you are man, remember there are always things that we can never understand but if we take the time to listen, we can help make a difference. It is time to man up, speak up and show these ladies our support.

And ladies, if a man is making a genuine effort to lead our sometimes egotistical gender in the right direction, please do not steer us off that path with discouraging comments. If we’re going in the wrong direction, don’t slash our tires, give us directions (you know we won’t ask for them.)

Let’s get on the same team and even the playing field; I promise you won’t regret it.

Surrey more deserving of rapid transit than Tri Cities

By
EIC
-
2

Surrey and Langley have less transit options and more bodies to move

By Tara Nykyforiak

From a completely practical standpoint, I believe the Evergreen Line is an unnecessary use of its projected $1.4 billion price tag. It will not provide Tri City residents with a previously unavailable route, but moreover it will not actually achieve one of its goals
of uniting the Tri-Cities more strongly together.

The Evergreen Line will begin at the Lougheed Town Centre station and run along Clarke Road in the Burquitlam area, where a new Burquitlam Station will be built for the line. From there, the Evergreen Line will continue down North Road en route to Port Moody until reaching the Barnet Highway in Coquitlam, where it will pass along to the Coquitlam Central Station and turn onto Pinetree Way, terminating at the Coquitlam campus of Douglas College.

If these stops sound familiar, they should. The Evergreen Line mirrors that of the 97 B-line. The bus route runs late (until 2:45 a.m., which is later than the last SkyTrain) and with great frequency — roughly every 10 minutes during the daytime, and every 30 minutes after 11 p.m.

There are also other options for people in the TriCities to take transit out of Coquitlam. Coquitlam Central Station offers the West Coast Express that runs all the way downtown, and the 160 bus runs from Port Coquitlam to Coquitlam Central and out to Vancouver. Really, the TriCities (especially Coquitlam) is hardly starved for transit options.

Surrey should have had priority over the Evergreen Line
with their Light Rapid Transit. I’ve taken transit from Surrey Central to Langley, and there is zero efficient and reliable coverage. There are no express buses, and trips on routes that exist currently between the two areas take over an hour and run only once per hour after 9 p.m.

So much time is wasted on these trips because they cover indirect routes to service residential communities along the way, and thus take much more time than is necessary for people wanting a direct ride from Langley to Surrey.

With a population over 450,000 — more than the entire Tri Cities and Maple Ridge combined — Surrey is the obvious candidate for the next transit expansion, especially considering that Langley residents often live where they do because of cheaper housing costs not proximity to their job. Transit need in Coquitlam and Port Moody, with a combined population

of only 160,000 and with a fully functional express bus route, cannot compare to Langley and Surrey where a third of all vehicle registration growth in Metro Vancouver is happening.

Living in the Tri-Cities, I have witnessed the development in Coquitlam and Port Moody over the past five years and the high rises that have come along with it. With this development in mind, proponents of the Evergreen Line look to the Tri-Cities’ increasing population and the line’s close proximity to high rise construction as its selling point. However, it will take years for the population
to increase to what Surrey’s is today, while Surrey population density continues to rise, leaving its residents trapped by its substandard transit infrastructure.

More to the point, the Evergreen Line’s goal of better connecting the Tri-Cities cannot be achieved based on the proposed route. Port Coquitlam and Port Moody do not factor into the line’s route. For this reason and for those listed above, I’m sad to think a more united Surrey and Langley transit system did not achieve precedence over the already well connected Coquitlam and Port Moody infrastructure.

Moral arguments against same sex marriage don’t have legs to stand on

By
EIC
-
0

BW-two moms - Marcin Markiewicz - Flickr

Our legal system must acknowledge modern standards of moral behaviour

By Mohamed Sheriffdeen
Photos courtesy of Marcin Marklewicz / flickr

The ongoing hearings regarding the legal validity of California’s same-sex marriage ban have re-raised several questions regarding legality and gay equality — principally in statements made by Supreme Justice Antonin Scalia when confronted during a guest lecture at Princeton last December.

Duncan Hosie, an 18-year-old gay student, denounced Scalia’s rulings in previous court cases that reduced homosexuality to actions “immoral and unacceptable.” Hosie specifically cited Lawrence v. Texas from 2003, in which Scalia compared homosexual conduct to bestiality, bigamy, adultery and obscenity before his coup de grace: Scalia reasoned that even if state law did not protect gays as a class, the state need not justify denial to equal protection by “anything more than a rational basis.”
Secularism is arguably one of the most significant principles that forwarded construction and operation of modern governments. Ideally, separation of church and state aims to mitigate the influence of individuals’ perceptions of morality and eliminate inequality borne by legal consolidation of religious beliefs.

It has become chic to identify religious individuals as blind followers of arcane texts – inherently bigoted and inflexible. Pope Francis, recently sworn in, has espoused the necessity of interfaith dialogue to strengthen ties between all people. He included atheists in the discussion, considering them “precious allies in the effort to defend human dignity . . . and in carefully protecting creation.”

At the same time, he also espoused his antagonism to gay marriage in widely distributed quotes as a “destructive attack on God’s plan,” calling gay adoption a “deprivation of human development.” If atheists, who outright deny the existence of god are more “moral” people than potentially religious gay married couples, what religious-based morals are we left with?

It has also become chic to identify governments as a monolithic creation of decaying social systems, but they too are composed of people — people who are stubborn and are tied to preconceptions of morality. This highlights an interesting dichotomy in global politics: all governments operate under the principles of fundamentalism — religious or ideological — cloaked under the guise of morality. Scalia summarized the viewpoint to Hosie last December: “If we cannot have moral feelings against homosexuality, can we have it against murder? Can we have it against these other things?”

Morality and absolute freedom constitute the great lie at the heart of nations. There can be no system of governance based on “morality” because the definition of morality varies drastically between individuals of different faiths and upbringings.

How can someone like Scalia defend the right to inequality by such a vague definition? The right of the state to uphold inequality by a mythical and imagined “rational basis”? What rationale can be considered sufficient to prevent individuals from loving one another without being demoted to second-class citizenship?
Moral law, human law and divine law all have their place in governance given the flexibility and the understanding of individuals that morality takes a backseat to equality. We cannot ridicule the Bible, the Qura’an or the Torah as being cast-iron documents without shaking our heads in disbelief at constitutionalists like Scalia for treating a human document as a sacrosanct wording handcrafted and delivered from Mount Philadelphia.

Obama’s recent defense of gay marriage under his “evolving” worldview has set a precedent that we cannot ignore. We cannot deny this evolution of human understanding and cast those who fight for equality under derogatory terms like those Bill Whatcott did while hiding behind the very same rights we seek to deny others. What kind of nation would we be? What kind of humans would we be?

Feminist criticism of Middleton misses the mark

By
EIC
-
0

BW-Pregnancy belly

Dissenting voices still reduce her to her reproductive organs

By Harleen Khangura

Hilary Mantel’s latest speech has raised a few eyebrows in the UK, mainly in response to her stinging comments on Kate Middleton. Mantel, an award-winning English writer, recently defended her speech by claiming that it is critical of the media’s objectification of the royal body. In other words, it is a feminist critique of the perceived value of a royal woman as a breeding ground for future royal heirs.

When I read her speech, I wasn’t appalled by her allegedly harsh remarks on Kate. Instead, I was taken aback by her overgeneralization of Kate’s lack of volition and the modern female gender role. I found her speech to be a grim indication of how we perpetuate rather than reduce gender stereotypes.

Mantel’s speech is infused with grating phrases like, “I saw Kate becoming a jointed doll on which certain rags are hung,” “a shopwindow mannequin, with no personality of her own,” and “designed by a committee and built by a craftsman.” While she may be condemning Kate’s public image as projected by the media, she also treats Kate as a nonhuman being, a marionette with zero ability to exercise her own will. Apparently, Kate’s much celebrated fashion style is not even her own invention, but that of the royal establishment.

Mantel goes on to suggest that Kate has been “chosen” for her role as a princess, completely disregarding that Kate and William chose to marry each other after several years of dating. Her feminist argument falls short because she presumes Kate to be a helpless woman who is incapable of asserting her agency even when it comes to styling her own outfits. This presumption bespeaks an oversimplified feminist ideology: women are always oppressed, so there is no way that Kate could have even chosen her blouse on her own.

Many argue that this is the crux of the issue with Kate: all she does is attend a few royal engagements, bedecked in designer outfits that every woman around the world immediately covets. But is Mantel really upset by Kate’s lack of identity outside of her fashion style (which, remember, is not even hers) or does her identity simply not fit what our society considers ideal?

The real issue is that Kate is not a career woman. Her role as a royal housewife and a mother-to-be conflicts with the modern conception of the female gender role, which values an independent, career-focused woman who can admirably balance both her work and home life.

One of Mantel’s statements, “the press will find . . . [Kate’s] only point and purpose being to give birth,” rightfully condemns the media’s reduction of Kate to a mere reproductive organ. Yet it also suggests that to only be a mother somehow belittles a woman’s identity
— that is to say, motherhood alone cannot satisfy the present model of an ideal woman.

Obviously, Mantel is not the only one thinking in faulty stereotypes. For many of us, it is often a matter of great surprise and embarrassment that housewives still exist. However, the role of a housewife or a mother is not necessarily antithetical to female empowerment.

The choice to be a housewife is an assertion of the many rights (i.e. self-determination) that feminists have fought for so long for.
Nowadays, women have countless lifestyle choices at their disposal. Our society’s model of an ideal woman, as indicated in Mantel’s speech, is therefore completely at odds with the present reality, which requires that we challenge current gender stereotypes rather than simply replace traditional ones with more modern constructs of who a woman should be.

Besides, establishing notions of womanhood is entirely against the spirit of what feminism is about. It’s about time that we embrace the true meaning of female empowerment and stop dictating how women should live their lives.

COLUMN: Molson 67: pour directly in toilet

By
EIC
-
0

As far as light beers go, this one’s the shit – the literal shit

By Adam Dewji

I bet you’ve seen those stupid commercials on TV for the Molson 67 beer, with some dude going jogging so he can enjoy a badass burger and an apparently palatable bottle of beer.

He sits down at a table in a bar with his friends, confident that he knows what he’s doing, and then tears a bite out of the burger. Notice that he has also ordered a Molson 67. Notice also that he never touches his goddamn drink. He looks at the waitress’s hand and takes a mean bite out of his burger with a look on his face that says “Oh hell no! I’mma eat this burger!”

Who markets their beer with its calorie count in the name, calls it a “guyet” beer, and then claims it’s not a diet beer? Who are diets for, then, anyways, demales?’

Sometimes you have to spell it out for people. It’s like running over your neighbour’s dog in front of their face, and then claiming that the dog ran into your tires.

There’s no person that I know, man nor woman, who would give two fucks about how many calories are in their goddamn beer, especially when they order a 2,000-calorie burger and fries combo. The drink tastes so bad, it’s like their food would have to be a chase for every sip of their Molson 67. Any calories you avoid by drinking it in lieu of a real beer would be negated by the need to cover the taste with the nearest food item.

This has got to be the worst excuse for a beer I’ve ever had (and I’ve had close to 300 kinds.) If you bought a Molson and pissed in it, it would probably have more flavor. This tastes like someone took half a bottle of Molson light and half a glass of water, mixed

it together and called it beer. You’d be better off dressing up a pile of dog shit in a sweater and putting it up for adoption.
If you’ve “always wondered” about what it would taste like, let me give you an idea: it should come with directions on the bottle for how to consume it, reading “Pour directly in toilet.” The three per cent alcohol-by-volume shows that this has a fraction of the alcohol content of a normal beer. Too bad it doesn’t even come close to having a fraction of the taste.

Think of another “light” econo-lager that some people actually drink, like a Bud Light, Miller Lite, or maybe just stick to water. You could always walk around for 10 minutes and earn the extra calories to drink a real beer, too.

Want a cheap lager that’s actually really smooth, and also in the same price range (cheaper than Molson 67)? Pick up a case of High Country Kolsch by Mt. Begbie Brewing.

Don’t waste your money. Buy a good beer, then take a guilt trip to the gym the next day like the rest of us. Just because it’s on Hockey Night in Canada doesn’t mean it’s worth drinking.

First Nations youth deserve more attention than two pandas

By
EIC
-
0

fn youth article

As the fastest growing demographic in Canada, politicians should be paying more attention

By Rachel Braeuer
Photos courtesy of Zhiigiwan Kwe Whetung

The emphasis placed on one of the three biggest stories in the news last Monday really told a depressing story: a group of First Nations kids walked 1600 kilometres to send a message to Stephen Harper, but he went and visited some pandas instead, however the desperate Liberals will talk to the youth — just not these ones.

In case you’ve been living under a rock, I’ll spell it out for you. Inspired by the Idle No More movement, David Kawapit Jr. of the small and isolated community of Whapmagoostui, Quebec started off on a 1,600 kilometre trek with six others to raise awareness of the living conditions on reserve communities such as his in hope of a better future for tomorrow’s youth. By the time the group, known as the Nishiyuu Walkers, reached their goal of Ottawa, they had swelled in numbers to almost 300.

Rather receiving Kawapit and the other Nishiyuu, Harper elected to receive two gift pandas from China. “These pandas will help [Canada and China] to learn more about one another while serving as a reminder of our deepening relationship,” Harper said of the symbolic gift.

Many have already criticized Harper for his choice, and rightfully so. “He should be getting his priorities straight, especially with the position he holds,” commented Sebastian Bearskin, one of the walkers. While the panda’s public arrival may aid a trade relationship, ignoring First Nations youth sends an equally strong message, deepening the divide between politicians and their needs and concerns.

“How many more kilometres need to be walked before this Conservative government listens to First Nations people?” asked Niki Ashton, Manitoba NDP MP in parliament. A fair question, if you know the history of First Nations activism in Canada. In response to Trudeau’s proposed patriation of the Constitution that would have wiped away Aboriginal treaty rights, approximately 1,000 First peoples, from grandmothers to toddlers, made the 4,500 kilometre trek in protest.

How much farther until any government takes First Nations, and especially First Nations youth, seriously?

Aboriginal youth are the fastest growing demographic in the country. “They are so often told they are the leaders of tomorrow. I’m here to say they are the leaders of right now. They are the leaders we’ve been waiting for,” announced Shawn Atleo, the national chief of the Assembly of First Nations, as the Nishiyuu’s journey came to an end. If First Nations youth are out in droves, willing to walk 1,600 kilometres in a political demonstration, why wouldn’t politicians want to meet them?

For all of the Liberal talk about the youth vote, I didn’t see Justin Trudeau at the walker’s rally. Sure, he tweeted “The Journey of Nishiyuu shows commitment to a better future for FN communities. Let’s equal that with real engagement” in both English and French, but a tweet just doesn’t suffice.

Canadian politicians’ lack of real engagement with First Nations youth, who are statistically more likely to be incarcerated than graduate high school, is an affront to their efforts to challenge this and many other dismal statistics. Do you get that, Trudeau, or are you the same as your father?

Instead of engaging with people who only care about approval from people with nice hair, or panda bears that only care about shoveling bamboo in their faces (and not the trade deals that will help decimate their natural habitat), politicians should be talking to the First Nations youth showing up on their doorsteps.

Letter to the Editor – April 2, 2013

By
EIC
-
1

Dear editor,
Re: Student Society says
“We Like It On Top”

The proposed gondola for Burnaby Mountain was spearheaded by the manufacturer looking to make another sale (after installing the Peak2Peak gondola in Whistler).

Rather than ending gridlock, the proposed cable car would facilitate the
speedy development of the UniverCity community. Left unmentioned are the added service vehicle trips on Burnaby Mountain roads to the upper gondola station’s viewing tower, restaurant (and casino) and condos.

A few years ago, in a moment of candor, the mayor of Burnaby, Derek Corrigan, gushed about the financial benefits to the city of the cable car as a tourist attraction (not as a mode of transportation). TransLink’s budget allocation to build and operate the gondola would in fact take away from traditional transit service for private profit.

A key argument claimed in favour of the proposed Burnaby Mountain cable car is that it will cut the travel time in half between Production Way Station and SFU campus. But it is the door-to-door trip time that really counts.

Leaving my home around 7:30am on a weekday, TransLink’s Trip Planner web site informs me that it will take about 34 minutes to reach the central plaza on campus. With the proposed cable car, the same trip from home to campus may take about 36 minutes. One quarter of this time is walking uphill in the rain from the upper “Town Centre” gondola station to the central campus plaza.

A TransLink information sheet advised that bus operations on Burnaby Mountain are interrupted or delayed on an average of about 10 days a year. Can we believe that a mid-air cable car will be more reliable in icing conditions, electrical storms, or gusting winds?

The proposed cable car is a tourist attraction and property development bauble but it may not be a public transportation improvement. Cable cars are simply “lipstick on a pig” of poor urban development..

Sincerely,
Derek Wilson
Concerned Community Resident

1...1,3051,3061,307...1,443Page 1,306 of 1,443

Simon Fraser University’s independent student newspaper since 1965.

For advertising inquiries: [email protected]
For promotional inquiries: [email protected]

© The Peak Publications Society

Simon Fraser University’s independent student newspaper since 1965.

For advertising inquiries: [email protected]
For promotional inquiries: [email protected]

© The Peak Publications Society