“Education is the point at which we decide whether we love the world enough to assume responsibility for it, and by the same token save it from that ruin which except for renewal, except for the coming of the new and the young, would be inevitable. And education, too, is where we decide whether we love our children enough not to expel them from our world and leave them to their own devices, nor to strike from their hands their chance of undertaking something new, something unforeseen by us, but to prepare them in advance for the task of renewing a common world.”

– Hannah Arendt

Under the category “youth,” the issues pop to mind immediately. This special issue on youth concerns is bound to focus on access to affordable post-secondary education, student debt and the burden of interest bearing student loans, and persistently high unemployment among youth.

The statistics speak for themselves:

• Number of Canadians ages 20-34: 7,291,100;
• Total student debt in Canada, including private loans: $28.3-billion;
• Average debt load for Canadian students upon graduation: $28,000;
• Canada’s 2012 unemployment rate of persons age 15 to 24: 14.3 per cent;
• Canada’s overall unemployment rate: seven per cent.

There is no question that Canada’s youth is concerned about where they will find a job in the field for which they have trained.

But we do our young people a disservice in assuming these are their only concerns. They care about the climate crisis. They care about social justice.

I travel Canada holding town hall meetings, open question and answer sessions on university campuses and speaking to high schools. And, even accounting for the self-selection that goes into the youth likely to attend Green Party events, I do not believe my impression of the concerns of young people is skewed. There are enough “captive audience” events that my anecdotal view of youth concerns is more than a reflection of a minority.

To get a sense of how young people, or at least one young person, would approach this topic, I emailed my daughter. Cate is now 22, a 2013 graduate of King’s University in Halifax, about to start her masters’s program, juggling several part-time jobs in the service industry while working as a teacher’s assistant at Dalhousie. I asked her how she sees the topic of “youth issues.”

“I think that youth are mobilizing effectively around two huge threats: climate change and damning levels of debt. There is a real connection between the two insofar as having a corporatized education model not only devalues the learning we receive, but also subsumes a possible source of resistance (critical thinking about politics) and incapacitates students unless they adhere to the structure, thereby depending on the societal parasite: corporate control.

“On a more essential note, youth fight for their two futures: the ecological one and the economic one. This is a struggle to protect what gives youth their very homes.

“For those youth who are outside post-secondary institutions, the market for their skills skews toward expensive accreditation. The cost of this accreditation can be prohibitive. Even though students fight tooth and nail just to keep tuition from rising, many also understand that the game is rigged, the system broken.

“This brings us to the unproductive idea that youth are cynical and apathetic. It is good to be skeptical when the received ideas you’ve lived with are motivated by the same projects that give rise to outright global climatic instability–seriously. Youth issues, then, are issues for all of society, if other people will hear the urgent claim. We seek to make the world radically different than how it now is because the world is still new to us.”

The notion that youth have a particular right to demand that their elders not wreak their future chances has never had to be enunciated by previous generations. No cohort of elders has ever been so cavalier about whether their children have anything like the opportunities, the life chances, of the previous generation.

Our life chances, the success of our economies, has been built on the largely predictable, stable climate coupled with a post-war boom.

The boomers have had the best of many worlds-economically and ecologically. Just as now former finance minister Jim Flaherty says, essentially, the rules of the game have changed: ‘Next generation, take your lumps on pensions,” so too are we saying, “tough luck kids. Sorry about screwing up the world.’ Increasing extreme weather events, crop losses, not-so-natural disasters, are the new normal.

We still have time in our generation (I say speaking to those of us over 50) to prevent much of what could be the worst outcomes for the next generation. We have time to provide affordable education on a healthy planet. A well-educated citizenry is key to our economic success, just as a healthy biosphere is a precondition to civilization. But as my daughter says, none of that will happen without some radical reorienting of our priorities. Ultimately, the question isn’t whether our kids are apathetic and disengaged; it’s how did the boomers get so apathetic that we do not fight for our children.

Originally posted in the Hill Times.

The post For Canadian youth, the future isn’t what it used to be appeared first on Elizabeth May.

Almost thirteen years later, youth in Canada face increasing problems – high levels of unemployment, diminished social programmes, weakened environmental protection, and the threat of climate change. It’s time for young people to speak out more than ever! Canada needs your energy, your fresh vision, your courage in order to regain the kind of fair and just country established after WWII – and presently being dismantled.

During the federal election in May, 2011, we saw young voters across the country – including Greens – turn out to vote with an increased sense of purpose and urgency. Unfortunately, with our first-past-the-post electoral system, the Harper Conservatives won a majority – although some riding results are being contested in the courts.

This year, International Youth Day comes almost one month before the next session of Parliament, which promises to be a great challenge to those who care about Canada. We call on our Young Greens, whose hard work and dedication we appreciate very much, and all youth to help stop the Harper Conservatives. In fact, with the support of aware, open-minded young people, we can make this country even better than before!

The post 2012 International Youth Day appeared first on Elizabeth May.

“It’s outrageous that a company with record profits of $4.9 billion dollars would bully its workers into accepting a 50% wage cut, lock them out and then close the plant a month later,” says GPO leader Mike Schreiner who attended last week’s rally to support the locked out workers.

This announcement came as Statistics Canada released new numbers that show the Canadian jobless rate has increased to 7.6 per cent. London already has one of the highest unemployment rates of any city in Canada. 

Green Party of Canada leader Elizabeth May joined her provincial counterpart in decrying the loss of jobs in an important sector. “The federal government has been undermining collective bargaining rights. We need to stand by our workers and protect jobs.”

GPO Labour Critic and London North Centre candidate Kevin Labonte called on the Liberal government to provide support the EMD workers.  “This is a tough blow to London and especially the families of the EMD workers,” says Labonte.  “We need the provincial and federal governments to commit to doing everything possible to help these families in their time of need.”

“The actions of Caterpillar highlight the importance of supporting local businesses that invest in their communities.” says Schreiner.  “It’s time to end the corporate handouts and provide a hand up for hard working Ontarians.”

The post EMD Closure a Blow for Ontario Jobs and Economy appeared first on Elizabeth May.

Canadians are among the most overworked people in the industrialized world. The Green Party wants to help restore balance in the lives of Canadian workers by increasing paid vacation entitlement at the federal level, and supporting provincial policies mandating shorter working hours.

The Green Party will raise the minimum paid vacation entitlement to three weeks. Many countries with minimum standards of four weeks and longer also have more productive and internationally-competitive economies than Canada’s.

Countries such as Denmark and the Netherlands have much higher labour standards, higher average pay, and far lower rates of unemployment than Canada, resulting in lower social costs to the country as a whole. Scandinavian countries, with the world’s highest labour and social standards, rank near the top in international competitiveness.

Recent studies show that a growing number of Canadians are not taking their full vacation or any vacation at all, and are working more unpaid overtime. This high-stress lifestyle is costing Canada’s already overburdened health care system more than $5 billion a year, according to the National Work-Life Conflict Study produced for Health Canada.

Canada’s current payroll tax system discourages employers from hiring more workers, even when the business needs them. The Harper government’s planned changes to the EI system, at the behest of Canadian businesses, could cause further downward pressure on job creation. It could even create an incentive to lay workers off. It is more cost-effective to hire temporary and short-term workers or get existing workers to work longer hours, including paid overtime, than to hire additional staff. This leads to greater worker and family stress.

In a progressive society, labour and business interests work together. In Canada, the Harper Administration has worked against this spirit of cooperation in cutting funding to the Canadian Labour and Business Centre, Canada’s longest-standing business and labour forum. It has cut funding to Status of Women Canada and passed legislation to remove pay equity from women in the federal civil service, despite the recommendation of a two-year federal review of pay equity in Canada.

The Green Party understands that decades of evidence proves that a society with a strong labour movement is healthier, has less income disparity, and a stronger middle class. Greens believe in the rights of workers to organize and in the free collective bargaining process. Labour rights are human rights. We believe in pay equity for women, in the equal treatment of organized and non-organized workers, and in workers’ right to fair wages, healthy and safe working conditions, and working hours compatible with a good quality of life.

Our jobs strategy is directly linked to the development of a green economy. There are tens of thousands of ‘green collar’ jobs, for example, associated with refitting Canadian homes and businesses for energy efficiency and renewable energy.

The Green Party wants Canada to follow the example of countries that treat their workers well and reap the benefits of low unemployment rates, less stress-related illness, and economies that rank among the world’s best in productivity and international competitiveness.

The Green Party is the only federal party to have concluded that the Temporary Foreign Worker Program (TFWP) is irredeemably flawed. We appreciate the need for workers in certain sectors, but the lack of rigour in assessing areas of labour shortage has allowed the TFWP to skew the labour market and undermine the proper salary by region for work, particularly in the service sector, but also in areas as diverse as helicopter pilots and professionals. At the same time, the program is exploitative of foreign workers, reminiscent of the shame of ‘coolie’ labour brought to build our railways. We need to place a priority on ending the high levels of unemployment among Canada’s youth, while bringing in foreign workers as future Canadians – not as temporary and vulnerable workers.

Green Party MPs will:

• Establish a federal minimum wage of $15 an hour under the Canada Labour Code;
• Advocate for changes in the Canada Labour Code that establish a minimum of three weeks paid vacation and a managed reduction in the standard work week to 35 hours;
• End the Temporary Foreign Worker Program;
• Create a domestic employment recruitment program to get willing young Canadians to job opportunities, modeled on how we have been bringing foreign workers to Canadian employers;
• Support federal ‘anti-scab’ legislation;
• Support changes to the Employment Standards law to provide equal protection to contract and temporary workers;
• Strengthen non-union workers’ rights and protections to close the widening gap between union and non-union workplaces;
• Increase federal inspections and establish stronger deterrents to illegal unpaid overtime work to achieve full compliance with Canada Labour Code standards. This will save money by reducing the costs related to the stress and social impacts of this practice;
• Change federal labour law to include a requirement that a poster outlining workers’ rights be placed in all federally-regulated workplaces as is the case under all provincial labour laws;
• Re-establish in law the rights to equal pay for work of equal value;
• Offer tax rebates to companies that provide on-site daycare, healthy food, and facilities for exercise and commuting by bicycle.

The post 1.8 Labour appeared first on Elizabeth May.

1.1 Principles guiding the Smart Economy, the Green Economic Plan
1.2 Applying these principles to economic decision making
1.3 Reporting the well-being of the nation more accurately
1.4 Fair taxes – fiscal reform
1.5 Balanced budget – debt reduction
1.6 Removing corporate subsidies: Distorting the market
1.7 Income trusts
1.8 Labour
1.9 Open source computer software
1.10 Small business loans and entrepreneurial incentives
1.11 Co-operatives
1.12 Railroads – re-establishing the national dream
1.13 Green urban transportation
1.14 Infrastructure and communities
1.15 Agriculture and food
1.16 Genetically engineered organisms
1.17 Fisheries
1.18 Green forest vision
1.19 Expanding cultural tourism and ecotourism
1.20 Mining
1.21 Energy industry: No to nuclear

The post Part 1: The Green Economy appeared first on Elizabeth May.

I wonder whether he has any thoughts on the difficulties that people who have become unemployed in the current economic downturn are having. I am certainly getting complaints about this. They are waiting so very long just to get someone on the phone to help them find the way to get their benefits.

Hon. Denis Coderre: Madam Speaker, there are far too many examples.

There is a problem with personal service. People are waiting on the line and are told that their call is important; press 1 if there is an issue; press 2 if they would like to have the question repeated; press 3 if they want a break. And their call might be answered in the next 15 minutes.

That is the problem. I have nothing against technology, but there is nothing better than personal service and a human voice. At the very least, if the service cannot be personal, the process should be. And when people call Service Canada, they should be able to get an answer.

Unfortunately, too often, staff are hired temporarily as a way of avoiding having to create permanent positions. We cannot defend the indefensible. I agree with the hon. member. Not only should people be treated decently and receive more benefits without a waiting period, but unemployed people who have needs should also have their calls answered.

The post Employment Insurance Act appeared first on Elizabeth May.

The Conservatives have said to us in the opposition benches that somehow we do not go out there and ask our supporters for support and that we do not go out there and put forward what our policies are. Speaking on behalf of the Green Party, we do, and we raise money from our supporters, but that money is easier to raise because there are very generous tax rebates, and they have benefited primarily the Conservative Party. I do not see the Conservative Party showing any interest in removing the very generous tax rebates that come from the people of Canada for the donations they receive.

I would like a response to why Bill C-13 goes after the smallest of the amounts of taxpayer subsidies to political parties and leaves aside the elephants in the room, the rebates on political party spending and donations.

Mr. Randy Hoback: Mr. Speaker, the rebate is something that has been a part of it. In the American system, a congressman or a senator can raise millions of dollars from whomever they want, with no accountability back to the taxpayer. I would rather take our system, which limits what we can donate. We get a tax receipt for contributing, for participating in the political process. I think it is a far fairer and safer system.

It is fair for every party. It is not just the Conservative Party that benefits from the system in place here. If the member raises funds and gets people to donate, her people will still get that tax receipt. That is the reality we are facing right now.

The post Keeping Canada’s Economy and Jobs Growing Act (B) appeared first on Elizabeth May.

I note also that the House took quick action in June to make sure the Government of Canada had the money it needed to operate, so we are debating substantive measures in Bill C-13, and many of them. It is a long bill.

Being a long bill, there are things in here with which I would agree. For instance, I agree with part 7 to provide help for students and student loans for people who are going into the medical field, but I am concerned with clause 181. I am sad that when we put forward amendments to clause 181 there was a closure on debate, so I was not able to speak to my amendment.

My question for the hon. member for Mississauga—Streetsville is, how will getting rid of the most efficient, fair and democratic part of taxpayer support for political parties create any jobs in our economy?

Mr. Brad Butt: Mr. Speaker, we are of the view that political parties should raise their own money. Taxpayers should not pay for it. I just ran an election campaign. I had to work real hard, not just getting votes, but raising money, and that is part of the political process.

I do not think taxpayers want to subsidize political parties through their tax money any longer, so we have included it in the bill. We were very clear. In fact, we ran an election campaign on phasing out the subsidies. We did not snap this on the House the minute the House came back in June. We were very clear with Canadians.

I think there is actually some moderate support among opposition members. They may not say it publicly, but a fair number of opposition members probably support phasing out taxpayer subsidies to political parties.

We were very clear. We campaigned on it. We won a majority government. We are implementing. We are getting on with the job.

The post Keeping Canada’s Economy and Jobs Growing Act appeared first on Elizabeth May.

[9hjCpHvOBxQ]

This system is exactly based on the voter choosing where the $2 goes, whereas the larger amount of tax dollars that the government does not seem to want to touch come from all of us. Whether we like or not, if someone donates $400 to a political party, we as taxpayers will give them back $300.

I would like the hon. member’s thoughts on how we can persuade the government that it is removing the exact part of the system that works best and is keeping tax dollars going to political parties that are far less democratic.

Mr. Hoang Mai: Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the hon. member for her question.

We are trying to convince the government. We have pushed for an amendment to the bill. We have explained to the government why it is important.

I totally agree with my hon. colleague in terms of the $2 per vote subsidy helping the party. It is more democratic, it helps in terms of money and it costs less than all the tax credits.

Basically, it is very important for our democracy. It is very important for us who are here and who are elected that the votes we get are translated into something that makes Canada move forward.

The post Keeping Canada’s Economy and Jobs Growing Act (C) appeared first on Elizabeth May.

The bulk of tax dollars going to political parties is for matters not related to the $2 per vote, which is the fairest and most democratic system that we have for public campaign financing.

[D3WhgbqrbN8]

Is the government now planning to at least reduce the subsidy in the form of credits for donations? Charitable institutions in this country would love to get 75% back on donations of up to $400.

Mr. Kyle Seeback: Mr. Speaker, reducing the subsidies for political parties is important, number one. I hear over and over again that Canadians do not want their taxpayer dollars being given to parties to support their activities. They think that parties should be able to raise the funds necessary to run their election campaigns.

I do take interest in my friend’s suggestion that we should look at whether people making donations to charitable organizations should receive a better tax credit. Perhaps that is something she should speak to members on this side of the House about. I am certainly in favour of supporting charities with a system like that.

The post Keeping Canada’s Economy and Jobs Growing Act (B) appeared first on Elizabeth May.