Kanata: It hasn’t been paradise for a long time.

In 1960 the former City of Kanata was nothing more than forest and farm lands just outside the Ottawa Greenbelt. Then developer Bill Teron acquired about 12 square kilometres of land and started building his “model community”.

Skip forward 50 years to find that by now over 130 square kilometres of woodlands and farms have been developed, providing homes for about 90,000 people. The separation between Kanata and Stittsville has been all but erased as both communities grew and the boundary lines became blurred, and the town of Carp is next to be subsumed. And the development continues unabated, providing more roads, housing complexes, office buildings, and shopping centres, all designed to attract even more residents and businesses to the area.

Now there’s a big fight underway over one particular tract of land that developers have owned for decades, and are now starting to develop. And the outcry from the local burghers as what has until now been essentially a free park (bought and paid for by developers) is about to go under the dozer just like the previous 130 square kilometers is deafening.

All those people who are themselves now living on once was productive farmland and pristine forests apparently see no irony in their political action to stop this development. “Where will we walk our dogs?”, they cry.  “Where will we cross country ski?” they bleat. And spare me the oh-so-righteous indignation that drips from their calls for the developer to “do the right thing” and give the property to the city so the locals will still have a place to “experience nature” without, presumably, having to get in their SUVs and drive down the road a piece.

Clearly there need to be controls on urban growth and, I suppose, in the case of Kanata it’s better late than never. But for all those beneficiaries of past developments to decry this initiative strikes me as nothing more than the height of hypocrisy.

Quote of the Day–Peter Kent

This morning on CTV’s Question Period, Craig Oliver was doing his usual pat-a-cake routine with Conservative ministers, talking to Peter Kent about his new job, and specifically his role (along with Julian Fantino) to capture more Con votes in the GTA in the next election they don’t want.

Kent responded with the usually Con rote pieces, making sure that there was at least one shot at the Liberals and a reference to the dreaded “opposition coalition”. (Bonus points for that Peter.)

But it was this comment, made in the context of a “political reawakening” in Toronto, as evidenced by Rob Ford’s election, that caught my attention. Kent was discussing how he meets with man-in-the-street Torontonians on a frequent basis and this is what they are telling him: “they are interested in getting more service for greater encroachment on their hard earned dollars, and that's exactly what we intend to deliver.” (emphasis mine)

I’m sure that didn’t come out quite right. Expect a retraction soon.

I’m with the kids on this one

The Windsor Star reports that a group of female students from a local Catholic high school were subjected to a 1 day suspension for cheering on their hockey team by wearing tops made of coloured duct tape.

It seems that this had become a tradition (the duct tape outfits, not the suspensions) during the school’s annual Father Zakoor Catholic Cup hockey game.

Mike Seguin, assistant superintendent of education with the Catholic school board, said the practice was never a board sanctioned tradition. He added it was banned this year after school officials got worried the outfits were getting increasingly “immodest.”

Apparently the girls asked permission to wear the outfits at the game and were told by the school authorities not to. They wore the outfits anyway and were therefore subject to disciplinary action.

Seguin said the girls were not suspended because their outfits were too skimpy. They were suspended for disobeying the rules, he said.

To the girls I say bravo. You were simply showing some school spirit, and did nothing that could in any way be deemed offensive. Take your lumps but be proud that you shone a bright light on one more piece of petty bureaucratic idiocy. We would do well in this country (and especially in this province) if more people followed your lead.

And to Mr. Seguin I say, get a life, lighten up, and watch more Red Green.

 

How others see us

The Gulf News is pretty brutal in its take on the “new” Canada under the Harper Cons.

Beginning with the statement “Prime minister's authoritarian approach has damaged its progressive outlook”, the opinion piece goes on:

Canada had rightly earned a status in the international community as a fair and open-minded country, willing to open its doors to all, willing to assist the needy, willing to embrace the downtrodden. It was always viewed as a nation willing to accept those fleeing political, religious and ethnic strife; its fabric enriched by the fact that one-in-three of its people were born elsewhere.

Sadly, this progressive outlook has changed.

Ever since Prime Minister Stephen Harper and his right-wing Conservative government came to power, the veneer of civility has slipped. Politics in Ottawa has become polarised — it is Harper's way or the highway. Independent institutions such as Statistics Canada or the Atomic Energy Control Board have suffered from political interference from the Prime Minister's Office.

This is followed by references to Canada’s protectionism, stance on the Middle East, and even Omar Khadr.

And ends with, “That's why Canada's citizens need a visa.”

Pretty hard to argue…

The woman’s just trouble I tell ya.

Why the surprise?

According to this John Ibbitson piece in the Globe and Mail, the Cons, Libs, and NDP have quietly agreed to scrap Bill C-12. The proposed legislation would have increased the number of seats in the House from 308 to 338 and gone some ways towards rebalancing the provincial distribution based on current populations.

The Harper government and the opposition parties have agreed to quietly sink legislation that would have given Ontario, British Columbia and Alberta more seats in the House of Commons. As a result, urban and visible-minority voters will continue to be discriminated against in Parliament.

When any provinces (in this case BC, Alberta, and Ontario) gain more representation then, by definition, the other provinces lose relative power. So facing outrage from Quebec and strong pushback from the Maritimes, our honourable members caved.

Is this a triumph of cowardice over principle? Or simply a matter of political expediency? Both I would suggest. While the NDP don’t really stand much of a chance in Quebec, both the Libs and the Cons are looking to make some solid gains there come next election, and the last thing they want is to have a bunch of Bloc-heads trotting out the “humiliation” card.

Inferiority complex? Not bloody likely!

So some flunky buried in the basement of that Sussex Drive monstrosity called the US Embassy doesn’t think Canada measures up to the US. And now, thanks to Wikileaks, everyone is reporting on Canada’s “inherent inferiority complex” as if it were a fact.

It’s true that the Harper Cons seem to operate in awe of the US and want to play with the big boys and their big toys, but I know of no Canadian who feels in any way inferior to our southern neighbours – except possibly for the fact they get to enjoy better weather.

If Canadians can be found guilty of anything in this regard, it’s that we can sometimes feel superior, smug in our social safety net as we look southwards at the current economic disaster our friends and neighbours are having to deal with. Now that’s something worth paying attention to – when we’re not busy reading the latest inane email from some low-level embassy staffer.