Wednesday, November 09, 2005
Sure, glass and tetra-paks are being stockpiled while markets are sought, but the program makes people take responsibility for their waste.
The real concern so far seems to be the added cost to consumers. You do get some of the deposit back when you take containers to the depot, but adding 50 cents to each five-pack of apple juice can add up if you have a large family.
Rather than complain, people simply have to change their ways. We don't have to help the food and drink industry maximize profits by buying drinks or food in smaller, seemingly more convenient units. In the days before tetra-paks, parents packed school lunches with juice or milk in a reusable thermos or bottle.
Time to do that again. Instead of paying deposit on five juice boxes that make up one litre, pay one deposit for a one-litre container. Spend the extra deposits to buy a reusable container if you have to.
You may have to wash it every night with the supper dishes, but remember, you're saving money and the environment at the same time.
It was a long time in coming, but the release of the plan detailing where Yellowknife needs to put classroom desks was a necessary exercise.
It was something of a combo-class in geography, science, logic and mathematics.
First the math: There are 880 desks sitting empty, most of them within the public school system.
The plan found that neither school board needed a new school because of this.
But instead it would seem that the Catholic board needs to work more closely with the public board to result in those empty desks being better distributed. Geography and science: If anyone needs an entire building, the report says it's Aurora College. It is bursting at the seams, which any science student will tell you is not a good thing if the vessel is inadequate.
We agree with the report's findings that Aurora College is long overdue for expansion. The Akaitcho Hall site would be a perfect place to start.
Logic, or the lack thereof: The Catholic school board wants a new school, but the report says the numbers aren't there to support it.
There are simply too many empty desks in the city.
Superintendent Kern Von Hagen says "practical, functional and pragmatic reasons" shouldn't be counted. Von Hagen, after all, wants a school.
But when it comes to spending a potential $18 million on providing the best educational facilities for Yellowknife students, those are exactly the three things that must be considered when deciding what to build, and where.
The plan has done its job to point the way. Taxpayers must be given a chance to have the final say if that road will be travelled.
Editorial Comment
Darrell Greer
Kivalliq News
Not all that long ago, Prime Minister Paul Martin promised his Liberal party would be ready, willing and able to call an election as soon as Justice John Gomery tabled his report on the sponsorship scandal.
While Gomery tabled the report this past Tuesday, Martin's not running anybody over on his way to the podium.
We gave Martin his due on the way he handled the first attempt to oust his minority government.
The prime minister proved himself to be a worthy tactician by convincing NDP leader Jack Layton to support his minority government.
The political landscape hasn't changed much during the time it took Gomery to finish his inquiry.
Layton is still using his promise of support to gain favours, this time targeting federal Health Minister Ujjal Dosanjh to block health-care privatization in Canada.
Conservative leader Stephen Harper is still howling for Martin's political head, as Bloc Quebecois leader Gilles Duceppe yawns in the back, waiting for social-thinking-Layton and the Prairie bad boy to get on the same page.
Martin is still holding two substantial cards.
First, he knows none of the parties really want to be seen by Canadian voters as the one primarily responsible for calling a federal election at Christmas.
Second, the Gomery report wasn't all that damning of Martin in his role as finance minister at the time of the scandal and the longer he holds off an election, the further it slips from the voters' minds.
If Harper has any chance of striking while the scandal iron is hot, he must get the NDP on his side, once and for all, during the next week.
The next opportunity the Tories have at toppling the Liberal government is Nov. 15 - Conservative Opposition Day.
A successful non-confidence bid at that time and we all stop at our local polling stations on the way home from the Northern store or Co-op with our Christmas goodies.
Arguably, the leader with the most to gain in this situation is Duceppe.
Like most of his Bloc predecessors, Duceppe has visions of being king of his own little country some day.
However, unlike other former Bloc leaders, he realizes that time is not now.
What Duceppe would like to see is an election called early in the new year so he can take advantage of voter outrage in Quebec to further solidify his grasp on La Belle Province and take another shot at becoming the head of the official Opposition party.
And, of course, he will all the while be trying to put the pieces in place to call another referendum before the next federal election.
Oddsmakers wouldn't be giving you much of a spread on this one, but we'll still take history over Liberal optimism.
Minority governments have a sad record in Canada and this one hasn't shaped up any differently.
Martin's only hope in escaping an election over the next four months is to continue buying Layton's support and hoping the NDP leader doesn't read enough support on the horizon to start believing his party could pick up substantial gains in an early election.
If Martin keeps Layton on his side, Harper can sling prairie mud until the cows come home, but those votin' doggies still won't get out of the barn.
Editorial Comment
Jason Unrau
Inuvik Drum
With the new family centre swimming pool in operation, regional trials coming up for a host of winter indoor and outdoor sports, as well as minor hockey, speedskating and figure skating programs available, the often-heard comment "there's nothing for youth to do" doesn't really fly in Inuvik.
However, it will be the typical refrain - more like a lame excuse - when snowmobile season kicks into high gear this winter. One can only hope Inuvik will make it through this season without anyone being seriously injured or killed blasting around town in the middle of the night.
The worst part is, the sleds are often stolen from unsuspecting owners so the thieves can take a joyride.
Idle hands are the devil's tool, or so the old saying goes, and some kids who don't take the opportunity to get involved in the many constructive activities available will no doubt dabble in activities that are not constructive and sometimes downright dangerous.
Ripping off sleds is bad enough, but it's a sad day indeed when elementary school children turn to the cheap thrill of sniffing solvents. It's a far cry from the days when sneaking a cigarette behind the school was considered the mark of rebellion.
These are the times Inuvik finds itself in and while most parents do keep a watchful eye on the extracurricular activities of their children, it is apparent that some do not.
What are we to do with this situation? You'd like to think they would want to keep their kids safe, but you can't force parents to take an active interest in their children.
Time after time, when issues of wayward youth come to the fore, it is the parents who are scrutinized since they are the ones expected to look out for the welfare of their kids.
Obviously the courts are doing little to deter youth from straying down the wrong path. I remember sitting in the courthouse last spring and witnessing a case in which a youth was given a slap on the wrist for damaging two sleds (both stolen) to the tune of about $1,400. No fines, no financial restitution to the owners, hardly the kind of punishment to deter this individual from engaging in the activity again.
So if we can't depend on the parents, the courts or just plain common sense to keep kids out of trouble, then who or what can we depend on?
If we're waiting for God to step in, we could be waiting until Judgement Day and by that time it won't really matter anyways. Judgement Day for Inuvik might look something like this: a pile of burned out snowmobiles with St. Peter sitting atop holding a jerry can of gasoline in one hand and a pack of Players Light in the other. Now try bumming a smoke from that guy!
Sure the town can make a 'snowmobile bylaw' and its officers and the local RCMP can try to enforce it, but that will do little good if parents don't step up to the plate and do their share.
For the love of God, remember the children!
Editorial Comment
Derek Neary
Deh Cho Drum
It's difficult to know the truth at times.
When one or more community members accuse elected leaders of some sort of injustice, sometimes all a reporter can do is seek the other side of the story.
There is, all too often, precious little tangible evidence (i.e. paperwork) to back up the allegations. Often it's a matter of one person's word against another's.
Family allegiances seem to play a central role in small communities.
When a member of one family is elected, that person's friends and relatives may thrive, or are, at least, perceived to be better off.
There are many tales of preferential treatment: jobs, housing, trips and other benefits are supposedly handed to people closest to those wielding power. We've all heard it one hundred times, or more.
There may also be a legitimate reason why certain individuals make gains: they're the most qualified or the hardest and most reliable workers!
On other occasions, those in authority do play fast and loose with the rules.
One might expect the community to rise up, but some people remain silent for fear of repercussions.
When only one person sounds the alarm, it may indicate there's simply a personality clash at work.
On the other hand, it could be that the outspoken individual is the only one with the courage to make a stand.
These charges of favouritism or corruption certainly aren't unique to the NWT.
Governments everywhere are accused of "cronyism" or "pork-barrelling" (the federal Liberals' "Ad Scam" sponsorship scandal immediately comes to mind).
So why would things be much different at the community level?
But that still doesn't mean every accusation has merit.
There will always be people who step up and criticize those in power, and there will always be media to give them publicity.
That is their right and, to some degree, their duty (so long as it doesn't become libelous).
Sometimes being an elected leader is more trouble than it's worth. But when faced with tough questions from member(s) of the electorate (or a reporter on their behalf), it's best to provide straightforward answers.
It doesn't have to deteriorate into public name calling or "mudslinging."
If you have a valid defence, then spell it out.
If your reasoning is sound, then the accuser will wind up looking petty or absurd.
In the end, it all comes down to credibility - and it's up to each person to decide for himself or herself who is to be believed.