Give A Day's Pay

This Friday, December 1, is World AIDS Day. Two years ago, a doctor in Markham, Ontario challenged the doctors at her hospital to donate a day’s pay to AIDS charity. Fifty doctors rose to the challenge. The next year the word had spread to eight hospitals, and this year they are extending the challenge to everyone. Click here to find out more.

If you have a steady annual income, please consider giving your pay for Friday to The Stephen Lewis Foundation or to Dignitas International. Perhaps December is a tight time with other giving. I expect that if you were able to give a day’s pay later in the year, either organization would gladly receive a cheque.

The Stephen Lewis Website describes the idea behind the give a day campaign nicely. “This movement to raise funds is driven by the firm conviction that whether you live or die with HIV must not be determined by your race, gender or citizenship. This is one part of the human family responding to the broader human family. This is a day to show global solidarity, human decency and compassion.”

Family Values

I’ve never been fond of the term “family values.” The values themselves are fine, but I think they are disproportionably focused upon by politicians and interest groups. I find that many people who preach about family values are cold and uncaring to the poor and excluded people of our society. It is often those who endorse “family values” that treat sexual minorities with hostility, for example.

I was brought up in a home that valued family, although they didn’t spend much time preaching about it. My parents loved me and loved each other, and they made efforts to spend time together as a family and instill values in their children that they thought were important. They taught us about honesty and wholesomeness. When we were small children, they ensured that we watched non-violent television and movies, especially those with moral lessons that they agreed with. My parents made lifestyle choices based on what was good for children growing up. We ate three balanced meals a day, and we always had supper together around the same table. My parents were not drinkers. And they spent weekends and vacations doing things that we could all appreciate as a family, such as board games, car trips, and museums, rather than parties.

My parents upheld most of what the “family values” people hold dear, with one major difference. They didn’t see that as being enough. My parents also instilled community values in us. They taught us to help others, to be welcoming and respectful to the elderly and the ill, and all people of different beliefs and lifestyles. They encouraged us to consider other points of view, and to compromise and cooperate with others.

The reason that I dislike the “family values” buzzword is that it is too insular in nature. It promotes an “us versus them” mindset. Individuals protect their spouses and children from the surrounding influence that they consider negative. Although it might include members of their church, the focus is largely on themselves and what is theirs, but they’ve set up walls against the rest of society.

Part of family values is caring about what is best for loved ones. I think that’s important, but I don’t just want to love my parents and my close friends. I want to care about what’s best for the crack whore who works the nearby street, and the gay couple on my block with the yappy dog. I want to do what I can for the single mothers in my city, and the angry teens who keep appearing before my provincial courts.

I don’t know what it would look like to do what I can for everyone. Sure, I could get involved with soup kitchens and youth groups, but I think it would start with my attitude. I need to value the life and well-being of everyone I come in contact with, regardless of their creed or situation. When I have opportunities for dialogue, I want to listen to their views and stories, rather than attack their choices, or tell them what I think should be true for them.

So many people want governments and society in general to protect and promote what is good for their family. I can understand that, but family values will be better preserved if they are expanded to include community values. If everyone was to treat the poor and excluded of our society with compassion and acceptance, they might find that there is less to protect their family from.

Where Have All The Good Samaritans Gone?

A teenager in the Annapolis Valley in Nova Scotia who had been missing since leaving a party around 11:00 on Friday, November 3^rd was found dead yesterday afternoon. His body was found in a swamp. In typical Nova Scotian fashion, the rural community has rallied behind the family to search for the 19-year-old boy. Friends, relatives, neighbours, and even people who didn’t know him or his family searched for Christopher Parks. Other people brought food. Maritimers are known for their practical displays of compassion, and it is nice to see that this tradition continues, at least to some extent. The sad part of the story is that if there had been more of that compassion, Christopher Park probably wouldn’t be missing in the first place.

Christopher was involved in a fight at the party that he left the night he died. Some reports say that he had been beaten up by three or four people. It’s also rumoured that the dispute was over a girl. I could write about the growing problem of violence in my province, but there is another aspect of this boy’s death that I’m also concerned about.

After getting beat up Christopher Park walked out of the party along Lawrence Road, which is near a swamp. The CBC news report says “Some said he was last seen in a ditch by the side of the road.” This indicates that more than one person saw Chris in a ditch, and kept going. What happened to the days when people stopped to help someone they saw in a ditch?

I thought about this. Would I have stopped for him? What would cause a person to decide not to help him? There is a good chance that one or two of those who saw him in the ditch were coming from the party. Perhaps they had been involved in the fight with him and therefore didn’t want to help him. Perhaps he had been drunk and belligerent at the party, and those who saw him in the ditch felt uncomfortable about helping. Or maybe one was someone (especially a female) driving alone, who didn’t feel safe picking up any stranger. Even if they didn’t want to get out and help someone on the side of the road, they could place a phone call to someone who would. In a small place like Berwick, they might have known his friends, and could have called them. Anyone could have called 911 so that the police or an ambulance could have come to help them. I expect that the people who saw Chris in the ditch and kept going are feeling bad about it now. They will continue to feel bad much longer than it would have taken to call 911.

The newspapers have quotes about what a nice boy Christopher was. Even if he had been an angry drunken idiot though, he didn’t deserve to be left in a ditch. His family didn’t deserve to find his body in a swamp this week. Compassion makes a big difference.

Climate Change: Canada's record so far

Canada is geographically the second largest country in the world, but it only had 33 million people. This means that we enjoy a great deal of open space. It is widely believed that Canada has copious amounts of fresh, clean water, and large forests. This is true, but perhaps not to the extent that people might think. Our wildlife is increasingly endangered by loss of habitat, and our rivers and lakes are quite polluted. Air from Southern Ontario and the United States floats to other more rural areas such as Nova Scotia, creating environmental sensitivities. Our environment is quite compromised, and it continues to get worse. In Halifax, we were the first Canadian city to make recycling and composting mandatory, but our sewers still lead directly to the harbour. We signed the Kyoto accord, but we still comsume more fossil fuels than most countries.

Yesterday in Kenya, at a UN conference on climate control, Canada’s efforts were criticized. Two environmental groups presented a list of 56 countries. The countries were ranked according to what they were doing about global warming. The first few nations on the list were Sweden, UK, Denmark, Malta, and Germany. Canada placed 51^st out of 56. The only countries that ranked lower were Kazakhstan, United States, China, Malaysia, and Saudi Arabia.

This ranking does not suit my image of Canada, or what I want my country to be like. I want our country to do more to fight for our future on this planet. Some of the most beautiful places in the world are within our borders, and we are taking them for granted. We are depleting our resources and polluting our nation and globe. What are we going to do to stop it?

Micro-credit

This week there is a Global Micro-credit Summit going on in Halifax. Delegates from 100 countries are meeting here to discuss their goal of helping 100 million of the world’s poorest families with small loans. There are so many things that I am completely ignorant of. I hadn’t heard anything about this until I saw signs welcoming the summit to my city. I didn’t know that the 2006 Nobel Peace Prize had been awarded to Professor Muhammad Yumus and his Grameen Bank for their micro-credit program.

I tend to be a little cynical, so I googled the words “Grameen Bank” and “interest.” I found this article that explains the features of Grameen’s micro-credit programs.

I was thinking about Africa and the loans made to African countries that put them so badly into debt. They helped the lenders more than the borrowers. One major difference there was that countries were loaned humungous amounts of money, which accumulated huge sums of interest. With micro-credit, individuals were loaned rather small amounts of money to help them with business initiatives to support themselves. Another difference is that micro-credit loans are usually made through non-profit organizations or institutions that are primarily owned by the borrowers. The article goes on to explain that when it is through for-profit organizations, “efforts are made to keep the interest rate at a level which is close to a level commensurate with sustainability of the program rather than bringing attractive return for the investors.” No mention is made of the interest rate for non-profit organizations, so perhaps it is either non-existent or extremely low.

The website goes on to explain some of the philosophy behind Grameen Bank’s programs. They believe that the poor are not poor as a result of lack of skill, but as a result of policies and institutions that must be changed. I especially liked what the article said next.

“Grameen believes that charity is not an answer to poverty. It only helps poverty to continue. It creates dependency and takes away an individual's initiative to break through the wall of poverty. Unleashing of energy and creativity in each human being is the answer to poverty.”

This is not to say that if a poor person wants to get out of poverty badly enough, they should be expected to do it alone. There are obstacles in place that we need to change and remove, and in the meantime they need a hand as they step over them. A small loan with low interest is such a hand. I think that until impoverished people are able to support themselves, there will be a place for charity. It is good to give to the poor, but it is better to help people help themselves. This will break the cycle of poverty.

High Seas Trawling

Here in Canada, we have long considered George Bush to be behind the times in environmental issues. After all, the man doesn’t believe in Global Warming. Occasionally though, he does make a good environmental choice. This fall he has agreed to support a trawling ban which will be discussed at the United Nations in New York. It is well known that dragging nets along the bottom of the ocean damages ecosystems. George Bush joins Autralia, Britain, New Zealand, Norway and Brazil in opposing trawling. I am pleased that Bush is speaking out against something ecologically unsound. Unfortunately, my own Prime Minister is opposing the ban. It is incredibly frustrating to have a government that is even less environmentally responsible than the United States. Federal Fisheries Minister Loyola Hearn claims that a trawling ban would be unenforceable, and would not do enough to protect the most vulnerable species. While that may be the case, it would at least be a start. The government also explains that no type of fishing gear is harmful if it is used properly. I’m not sure if this argument is valid or not, but if it is, then the fishing gear is most certainly not being used correctly and hasn’t for years. It makes sense to ban the use of the gear to prevent its misuse. There is a more likely explanation that Ottawa didn’t offer. It is that the ban threatens big fishing business, and the Harper government is working in the interest of these companies.

Lest We Forget

This was the first year that I had mixed feelings about wearing a poppy. As a child and teenager, I saw Remembrance Day as a time to reflect on the horrors of war and to be grateful for the sacrifices that soldiers made for our freedom. Soldiers fought for different reasons. Many went out of a sense of duty and loyalty to Canada and Britain. Perhaps some went in the interest of doing what they could to restore justice to the situation. Others went seeking adventure. They had no idea just what a terrible sort of adventure it would be. My mother had an uncle who ran away and lied about his age to enlist when he was 16. He came back “shell shocked” and lived the rest of his life in institutions. My mother had to older uncles who went to war as well. One never spoke about his experiences. The other was proud to be a veteran, spoke with emotion about his memories, and took part in Legion activities. All three of these reactions to the war were common.

It’s tempting to think of those who fought in the world wars as unwitting pawns in a game between the world powers of the time. The little people thought what they were told to thought and did what they were told to do, and died doing it. I think it’s important to respect their courage to do what they considered was their duty, whether we believe in war or not.

In junior high, one of my teachers showed us a series of videos put out by the War Amps entitled Never Again. They depicted the horror of the war, and the importance of avoiding another war. I had always thought that Remembrance Day was about not wanting to repeat the experiences of the past. War was a painful mistake that we needed to learn about so that we would not make it again. Isn’t that what “Lest we forget” meant? Perhaps all that is meant by “Lest we forget” is that if we don’t honour the sacrifices of those who fought for Canada, they will have died in vain. I thought it also implied that if we forget what they went through, we would wind up in the same miserable situation. Remembrance Day for me has always included gratitude for the peace I experience in my life, and the desire to keep it that way.

Over the last year, I became aware that Canada’s mission in Afghanistan was not our usual peace keeping ritual, but a war. We are at war against the Taliban. As much as I don’t like what the Taliban represents, or the life Afghanis had to bear under it’s rule, I don’t agree with warfare. My poppy can’t represent the War Amp’s slogan “Never Again” this year. We are at it again. We’ve been at it for four years, and I just wasn’t admitting it. Afghanistan is a much smaller war than those fought in Europe by our fathers and grandfathers, but it is a war all the same.

I commemorate the sacrifices made by WWI and WWII soldiers and their families for my country. Today I remember those who are fighting and dying in Afghanistan, and those who love them. They are brave and committed people. I appreciate their sacrifices, but I don’t agree that they should be making them. To me, remembering war includes wanting to end it. It’s naïve to think that every individual on Earth will ever be committed to peace, but it’s a nice idea all the same. If every individual simply refused to participate in violence, there would be no one for the politicians to send to war. This seems like a disastrous idea, I know, because if we just refused to fight, what would stop other countries or terrorists from attacking us? I know those in our military are there because they want to defend Canada and the human rights that Canada stands for. On the other hand, the more people who refuse to fight, the closer the world would be to not having terrorists.

Remembrance Day is held on the 11^th of November every year, because on the 11^th hour of the 11^th day of the 11^th month of 1918, WWI officially ended. WWI was known at the time as the war to end all wars. Unfortunately, it didn’t end all wars. There are several different wars going on today. We can’t just blame Hitler and Saddam and the Taliban, etc for these subsequent wars. We have to take responsibility for our part in the conflicts. Canada has been a peace-keeping nation for decades, but we are back at war. Is that what we want? If not, what are we going to do about it?

Aids in Africa: Part 2

Forty million Africans are infected with HIV or AIDS. Overwhelmed with hunger and warfare, the continent has not been able to deal with the AIDS crisis. For hundreds of years, Western civilization has been benefiting from African resources, but we are not doing enough to help them in their dire need.

An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure, or so the proverb goes. Non-governmental organizations are working hard to educate Africans about AIDS prevention. For example, they are rewriting the words to well-known religious and anti-apartheid songs to teach about safe sex. This is good news, but it’s not enough. Currently there are 3 condoms per year per sexually active male available in Africa. I don’t know too many men who only have sex three times a year. As for female condoms, there is only one available for every 250 women. Some organizations don’t believe in contraception at all, while others simply don’t want to promote premarital sex. While I respect their beliefs, I think it’s time for these organizations to reconsider their policy regarding condoms. Is this one moral issue more important to them than the lives of millions of people?

Much of the money meant to help with the AIDS crisis is spent on the wrong sorts of things. According to Oxfam Canada, last year in Mozambique, 350 million dollars was spent on consultants. These consultants were mostly white males from the West, and they included people from organizations such as the World Bank. Only 74 million dollars was spent on public systems that would directly help the people of Mozambique. There is so little money in African health systems that a large percentage of African medical health professionals are relocating to countries such as Canada and Britain. Even in places where they have drugs to available, there is a grave shortage of trained medical staff to administer them.

In May 2004, Canada passed a bill that was known at the time as “Jean Chetien’s Pledge to Africa,” but now it’s called “Canada’s Access to Medicines Regime”. The idea was that Canada would produce cheap generic medication to and send it to Africa. This was a progressive and proactive new plan and I remember being happy to hear about it at the time. After two and a half years, the number of cheap generic pills that have made their way from Canada to Africa is zero. Click here to read an article outlining the reasons for this inaction. Bureaucracy seems to be a big part of the problem, and perhaps greed as the process to get permission to make genetic versions of drugs is being delayed.

One problem with government aid is that governments change. While our past leaders didn’t exactly work miracles for the AIDS situation, at least they were talking about the problem. The international AIDS conference was held in Toronto in August, and the Harper government was not represented, nor did they make any public statements that week. A couple press conferences were made and cancelled throughout the week, while NGOs and the press harshly criticized the Tories for their silence. Finally Harper announced that there would be no announcement. He said that the situation was too politicized. As the elected Prime Minister of a nation, I would think that every situation he is expected to attend to is politicized. Such is the life of a politician.

We can't all rush off to Africa to administer drugs and help in safe sex education. What we can do is give money to NGOs like Oxfam and the Stephen Lewis Foundation. If you don't have any money there is still something you can do. You can also write to your MP and Harper demanding that they do something. Remember, writing to a federal politician doesn't even cost a stamp.

Why is Africa Our Problem?

I plan to discuss what the West is doing and not doing about the AIDS crisis in Africa. If I had any readers at all though, they might be wondering why I assume that the West is obligated to do something about Africa. I recently read this aritcle in Walrus Magazine, which clearly listed reasons why with more authority and detail than I can. The West did not take AIDS to Africa, but it did render Africa unable to deal with a crisis like AIDS. Most of the ecconomic, political, and social problems in Africa are a result of colonialization and post-colonial exploitation by corporations and governments. The article lists specific actions of a variety of countries. For hundreds of years Western nations and companies have been getting rich from African resources (both natural and human) and inflicting policies that have had grievious effects on African societies. Even when the West has tried to help Africa, it has often been with certain conditions, which helped Western ecconomies and political agendas more than Africa. Helping the situation in Africa is not about charity. It's about righting hundreds of years of wrongs. Of course bringing justice to centries of injustice will be a slow process, but we owe it to them to try.

AIDS in Africa: Part 1

The other night there was a panel discussion on the HIV/AIDS situation in Africa. I will write what I learned there in two posts. Tonight’s will highlight the situation, and the next will look at what is being done (or not done) about it. The speakers focused on women because women are much more vulnerable to AIDS than men, for biological, cultural and economic reasons. I was not aware that women are more likely to get HIV. Men are naturally less likely to contract HIV, and if they are circumcised, they are an additional 20% less likely to contract it. In some African cultures, women are still not allowed to look men in the eye, and they sit on the floor while men sit on chairs. This systemic hierarchy would inhibit women from demanding protection during sex. The inequality also contributes to the amount of violence and sexual violence against women. It also means that women receive less education, as they are often removed from school at an earlier age to become caregivers. Less education gives them less options to provide for themselves and their families, which limits their resources when AIDS does enter their lives.

One of the speakers was film writer and director Thom Fitzgerald, who made The Hanging Garden and Three Needles. Three Needles was filmed in Africa, among the Pondo Tribe. Thom told us about some of the unsafe practices that contribute to the spread of AIDS. For example, in this region of South Africa, 54% of school children are raped. Another example involves good intentions, but unfortunate results. Young men aged 15-18 undergo a ritual of manhood. They each build a grass hut for themselves. Then they are circumcised and spend the next several weeks living in their huts being taught things they will need to know to be a man. The disturbing part of this ritual is that the machete used for the circumcisions is not cleaned or sterilized at all between boys. Sometimes as many as 100 boys are circumcised at once.

Some regions of Africa are so ravaged by AIDS that they are forced to make some very difficult choices. For example, there are drugs available to prevent the transmission of HIV/AIDS from parents to children, but the Pondo people prefer that children of those infected with HIV/AIDS contract AIDS. The reasoning behind this was that the region is overwhelmed with orphans as it is, so it would be easier if the children on AIDS patients died of AIDS too. Many African nations have severe shortages of medical professionals. Their nurses and doctors are working in Western countries such as Canada, the US, and Britain. Forty million people are infected with AIDS. As parents die, millions of grandmothers are left to take care of their grandchildren. Some grandmothers look after more than a dozen children. What is the West doing about this horrific situation?

Trust Funds

It seems that the Tory government has finally done something I agree with. Lately big companies have been switching from being corporations to being trusts. This has some meaning for investments that I don’t understand, but it also meant that the companies didn’t have to pay taxes. Tim Horton’s, Bell Canada, and Tellus are examples of big corporations that became trusts so that they didn’t have to pay taxes. I learned about this trend earlier this summer, and had found it disheartening. Now that big companies were becoming trusts, the situation was getting even worse. The government was losing billions from these trusts. Canada need tax dollars. We complain all the time about the sorry state of health care, military, foreign aid and other programs. We cannot expect these programs to improve if we allow big business to have huge tax breaks. Long ago, individuals paid about 50% of Canada’s income revenue, while corporations paid the other 50%. Over the years corporations have paid a smaller and smaller percentage of the income revenue. Recently they have been paying about 25% of tax revenue, leaving individuals to pay 75%. The trust fund trend was bringing the percentage of business tax revenue even lower. It’s great news that this loop hole has been plugged. I am stunned that the Harper government has done something that I would have done if I was in office.

Unfortunately, the new rules were announced on Halloween, which was a Tuesday. Investors didn’t have a chance to process the information that night and they lost money the next day. There seems to be a great amount of anger in the country about that. Harper had also declared before being elected that he would not make such changes. It’s common for politicians to gain new understanding of issues once they assume leadership of the country. I’m more concerned about the decisions that politicians make in power than how consistent they are with their election promises. We should understand that it’s likely that sometimes leaders will need to change their minds when they see the details from the point of view of the seat of power. It’s a shame that so many people lost money on the changes. If the changes were announced on a Friday, the losses could have been prevented. One caller on “Cross Country Checkup” pointed out that they could have halted the stock exchange for a few days while the public learned of the changes. Most people who have investments are those who are pretty well off. The millions of people who use food banks do not have investment portfolios. They are the sort of people who suffer the most from loss of government tax revenue. I feel badly for those who suffered financial losses this week, but I hope that they can take comfort in knowing that this decision was the best thing for Canada in the long run.