Taylor Noakes {.} Com

Sad and frustrating all at the same time…

Restraint
Restraint
Restraint

The only three Rs I could care about in times like these.

Let me get this straight: the education minister quits as a result of the impasse what with the student strike.

She’s replaced by the old education minister, who is already the head of the treasury board as well as the deputy premier. The crisis has no conclusion in sight.

So why was she allowed to up and quit?

There ought to be penalties against this – how many times have various politicians, cabinet ministers, presidents of public universities or public transit agencies simply walked out on the job (in some cases collecting major severance packages) without facing their critics and any potential lawsuits heading their way?

It’s sad that she felt compelled to leave as a result of the student strike. It infuriates me that Charest would accept that. What kind of message are they sending to the youth of Québec? Is the strike working in that its forcing ministers to quit? Will this not encourage students (and the myriad anti-government organizations going along for the ride) to press on?

And it’s not like it will change anything. Both sides have dug in their heels, without wanting to give an inch. At a certain point standing by your convictions becomes hopelessly futile and anti-productive. Refusing to negotiate with a lunatic despot is one thing. Charest hardly qualifies, he can be negotiated with.

Now I’m less certain though – allowing Beauchamp to resign her post means he has to come back to the table even more stubborn than before. And now the more militant core of the protest movement may feel their tactics are working.

All of this is leaving the general public in a hopeless state – if the government can’t do anything to resolve the crisis, what do the students propose we should do? It’s not like they have any better answer than ‘give in’.

Ideally, education should be 100% state funded, but that won;t happen with the current government and I can guarantee you won’t happen under any péquiste government either. The student movement could be working out a brilliant solution to this mess, but they can’t seem to do more than bully those who disagree with them.

Not to mention pissing off the general public. Last week’s Métro smoke-bombing was idiotic to say the least. Take it as an indicator the general public is losing faith in the student leadership and the movement as a whole – the cops used social media and found a plethora of willing tattle-tales to rat out these presumed free-tuition fighters.

But now they may face a terrorism charge, and five years in one of El Presidente Harper’s ‘supermax prisons for leftist intellectual re-education’. Okay, I’ll admit it – they haven’t yet settled on the new name.

A terrorism charge? For a smoke bomb you can pick up at any military supply store?

They didn’t kill anyone. No one was hurt. The economy didn’t grind to a halt.

All they did was piss Montrealers off and lose credibility.

It almost makes me think they should be let go, but that’s not right either. Five years of community service, helping young immigrant kids learn how to speak French… now there’s an idea I’m certain would make almost everyone happy.

And finally in this cavalcade of excess: Victoriaville, and the SQ’s annual attempt to remind everyone that yes, indeed, they are still the thugs we know and loathe from Oka.

All of this is leading me to an awful conclusion. When it comes time for the next provincial election, my choice will be between a bunch of closet social conservatives who smell to high hell of collusion, nepotism and myopic ‘nation-building’ policies, and Jean Charest’s inept PLQ.

Why do we do this to ourselves? We were once so very great.

PHP Freelancer

The very definition of insanity is to do the same thing over and over again, each time expecting a different result.

It’s high-time the student leaders of Québec recognized this fundamental truth.

We’re almost into the third month of 2012′s Maple Spring and nothing has changed, other than public sentiment towards the striking student protesters. To say nothing of the rest of Canada, where the vitriol often reaches into the depths of anti-Francophone racism and hysteria. But one thing at a time, we’ll deal with our federal PR ratings later on.

The talks have broken off because the largest, or at least most visible, most provocative organization CLASSE, was not recognized by the education minister. Bad move on her part. It’s not just that the protest is now a 24-hour kind of affair, but it happens in multiple locations too. It is all-encompassing, and includes a general population of the disenchanted and disenfranchised.

But the violence which has characterized almost every major demonstration, largely as a result of the heavy-handed tactics employed by the SPVM, in addition to the disruptions to traffic and transit, the lost revenues and the bad morale, bad blood, is all starting to pile up like so much unwanted garbage. Because neither the apparent ‘leaders’ in government, nor the legitimate student protest movement, can accomplish anything as long as both sides dig in their heels, the city as a whole suffers. As Charest fails to act, opposition to him will manifest itself in multiple ways. Already, fringe extremist elements have indeed infiltrated the student movement, inasmuch as those generally displeased with the current provincial government, or separatists, or trade-unionists. I sometimes wonder how politically savvy Charest really is, as his inattention and ill-advised stance seems to making a bad problem worse.

Yet, when it comes to the inevitable provincial election, it will not be the students playing king-maker – students don’t generally pull themselves together to get out the vote (and by that I mean actively engage themselves in making sure others vote, and not just exercising their own limited franchise individually). Thus, the decision will be made by a small majority of primarily middle-class and middle-aged Québecois, as it is and seems always to have been. And they support Charest. Some of them are ‘happy’ the police are ‘kicking ass’.

And it’s the police which ultimately wins out. The estimated $3 million in extra costs associated with the student demos will be paid – I can guarantee it – by the tax-payers. These are primarily the same people who will determine who wins the next election. They want well paid cops, and they see police in riot gear as money well spent. There’s every reason for the SPVM to encourage additional violence, additional rioting – it makes sure they get paid, and that’s the bottom line.

So the student movement is going to have to consider some alternative actions if they have any hope of reaching out to this key demographic and effecting a change. But what could they do?

For one, they could exercise far stricter control of rallies, marches and the like. And I mean Malcolm X, early-1960s Nation of Islam in Harlem styled discipline. Perfect manners, a ‘uniform’ of individuals’ Sunday best, rank and file marching etc. It will shock and awe if only for its sheer novelty, and will convey a crucial message: we mean business. Imagine if the striking students wore business attire or their closest approximation – it would be very hard to distinguish ‘dirty hippies’ from ‘respectable citizens’ and it would win hearts and minds too.

For two, information. The most crucial part of any mass public protest is communications, and this student movement sucks at broadcasting the message. The argument is that the mainstream media won’t listen or will manipulate the message is a lazy cop-out, frankly. What’s ironic is that the movement has excellently employed the use of modern mass communications tools to organize their demos, but hasn’t done much to actually reach the public, present a clear and concise case, and win-over public sentiment. I suggest going old-school, really old-school. Hand out pamphlets, newsletters, flyers. Post bills. Build websites and centralize the voice of the movement around it’s most eloquent spokespeople. Again, exercise strict discipline in how and who disseminates the message, but do everything you can to ensure the progressive point of view is ubiquitous and understood by any interested citizen (and remember as well – the majority does not have a university or college education, and the establishment went to school so long ago we have almost nothing in common with them). Yes, this will cost a small amount of money – the leaders, many of who are paid union members, can use their salaries to pay the printing and hosting costs, or else a collection should go around.

And be consistent. Is this not the iPhone generation? A generation of tech-savvy communications specialists hooked up (in most cases since birth) to the greatest self-expression machine of all time? So why is it so hard to get a consistent, clear and concise message across to the general public?

Stop fucking up the transit and traffic system – it’s bad enough as it is. Either get a full police escort for the march and inform people of the route, or don’t do it at all, because it’s pissing people off unnecessarily. I don’t think the smoke-bombers are anything more than wannabe anarchist poseurs, perhaps mere vandals, but either way, attacking the public transit system is just idiotic. We want people using the Métro – remember we still need to save the planet on top of figuring a way out of the tuition increase, right?

It’s time to change the tactics. It’s time the student movement takes a close look at the popular revolutions which have actually succeeded long-term and forget about the populist, and fundamentally lazy and self-destructive methods used up until this point.

If it’s not working today, why expect it to work tomorrow?

It’s time to build a student society – real connection through hard-work, altruism and cooperation. Let our generation turn the tide by doing things differently, and forget the methods which have failed so broadly.

Ultimately, ask not what the movement, our government or our society can do for you, but what you can do for your society – today but most importantly, for tomorrow as well.

PHP Freelancer

Mural in the Plateau depicting the Great Peace of Montreal – not the work of the author

Enough is enough – we need to end the bogus fabrication that is the notion the French language is threatened in Québec. We further need to end the on-going demonization of the so-called Anglophone community of Québec.

It’s an unnecessary tension. It’s a scab we don’t stop picking. Anglophones and Francophones are equally guilty in perpetuating this wholly destructive linguistic war of attrition. It has cost us (and by us I mean all Québecois regardless of mother tongue) our prestige, our status, our wealth and the weight we once had to steer the Canadian ship of state.

I want Québec to wield the same political and economic sway we had back in the 60s and 70s. I want Québec to grow to hold a steady quarter of the national population, perhaps more. And I want us to invest in ourselves, and to plan strategically, so that the future isn’t robbed from our children by our myopia, but is instead guaranteed by our foresight. I want progress, prosperity and peace for our people – my people.

And doing all this, committing to this, starts with a single act – a burying of the hatchet between the two major-minorities; the Anglo-Québecois and French Quebecers must make peace in a very real, tangible way.

If we don’t, we can at best only guarantee stasis. At worst, we’ll eventually instigate the conflagration that finishes Canada once and for all. And I don’t mean that as a call to arms – far from it. I can only lament the fact that as human beasts we are more than capable of Balkanizing North America. Thus, a second Great Peace of Montréal, so that our city doesn’t suffer a fate worse than Sarajevo. If you honestly think such a thing could never occur here, I can only respond that you should never underestimate how idiotic and hopelessly, tragically violent human beings are. What sets us apart and what gives us our strength is that the legacy of the first Great Peace lasted for so long, and I believe has ingrained itself deeply enough in our collective psyche. But with the recent shit-fit concerning the status of the French language in Québec, though specifically in Montréal, and all the mindless aggression and vitriol which has spewed forth since, at home and throughout Canada, I firmly believe it is time to end the bullshit. And the youth of Québec can do it, but it’s the establishment that needs to lead.

When Kondiaronk made his way to Ville Marie in 1701 he did so at his own peril. He knew he’d likely not survive the trip; though they knew not of communicable disease, they knew close contact could bring about sickness. Regardless, Kondiaronk, the great Huron leader, pressed on and committed to seeking a lasting peace between the various First Nations in the region and the imperial French. Can we not do the same today? Can we not seek to establish a linguistic peace in Montréal?

The Anglo-Québecois are not the enemy of the people of Québec, they are Québecois. They have accepted French as lingua-franca. They are committed interculturalists. They represent the linguistic ideal of lived-bilingualism, and as long as the community continues to embrace these notions, and seek bonds with their French-Canadian cousins throughout Canada (as examples of the many linguistic minorités-majoritaires in Canada), they’ll continue to represent the best we can hope for with regards to cultural integration, the best kind of voluntary cultural involvement. It’s time we (and this is an appeal to all Québecois) stop running from what could benefit us all (ergo, an end to punitive language restrictions and the continued demonization of a minority culture within Québec, and the push for more harmonious relations between all the constituent cultures and nations of Québec). We have the roots and the people, within the apparent solitudes, who have already shown us the way by seeking peace and integration, so why does this need to remain a case-by-case occurrence. Can we not make this a societal goal? Or do you want to tell me those who do are traitors to a cause? It’s amazing how much 19-th century rhetoric pops up in supposedly 21st century politics.

I don’t know what another Great Peace would look like, what it would constitute, who would lead it or how it could be applied. In 1701 is was straightforward, a cessation of open hostilities, the stimulation of trade and inter-ethnic cooperation. So why get bogged down in the details – we can apply those ‘old’ ideas effectively on the society we have today, and the message remains simple enough to be widely palatable. Perhaps it should be part of a great new national project, a whole new initiative to get us to stop our own pathetic demise.

Lest we recognize the whole conflict is gnawing away at the guts of a once great society for the purposes of pushing copy of a once great publishing industry. Of this both sides are guilty. It’s the problem with a society largely at peace with itself, despite what the pundits and politicians say, we’re not actually fighting each other. But for the purposes of propping the commercial interests of our own, decidedly American Yellow Press, we engage in something so deceptively innocent as a war of words. If only ours was an innocent naiveté – we’ve seen what mere words can do. In the past they created genocides, yet we act as though we either conveniently forgot or else exist on a higher plane. Our negligence is criminal, as both halves rip at the other, not realizing their true nature.

I’d love to see our society as Janus.

But instead when I look at our flag I see in the field of white the outline of two angry liars, butting heads against each other while talking down to one another, their shoulders leaning in – an exclusive, self-aggrandizing national argument set between the fields of blood we had once hoped would unify us.

It’s terribly fitting, and I honestly hope it was a mistake, and not an enduring truth about the incompatibility of humanity and the futility of a national project undefined for too long as a result of our odd humility.

PHP Freelancer

Sweet Christ, I can’t believe this shit is still happening in 2012.

I have respect for police and law enforcement who respect the law and don’t abuse people. I will address them by the title they deserve, office, constable, what have you.

That said, I’ll gladly and enthusiastically substitute a variety of porcine alternatives to deal with the shmucks in this article.

Since 9/11 we here in the West have allowed our civil liberties to be walked all over, so much so that it has taken its toll. Racism is up, common sense is at an all time low, and we’ve stacked the deck against us in the hopes it might prevent terrorism.

Now we know better, but it’s too late. We’ve given ‘law enforcement’ a carte-blanche to do whatever they want, and as you might imagine, the bottom-feeders of the SPVM and other local police farces have been getting a lot of work lately.

In case you missed it, black men can’t drive their girlfriend’s car and call the cop buddy – that’ll get you a $75 ticket (video above).

A few days ago a report concerning a Crown Prosecutor in Longueuil, Valérie Cohen, who believes it is okay for police to pull over someone if the ‘race doesn’t match the name’, as in the case of Joel DeBellefeuille and David Levesque. I guess they should have thought about that before their parents chose to give them names to help them better integrate into Québec society.

And then of course we have Francis Grenier, out of the hospital but it’s still unclear as to whether he will get to keep his right eye. You see, the pigs discharged a grenade launcher in his face.

I’m amazed by the comments I’ve seen, heard etc over the last few days. Grenier was playing a goddamned harmonica for fuck’s sake, and yet there is remarkably little sympathy from the establishment. Ted Bird (remember him?) tweeted something about how he hoped the cops would ‘kick the shit out of the protestors’ at today’s anti-police brutality march.

Really?

Yes, really… unfortunately.

I see this kind of shit all the time, from editorial pages to forums and the like.

Maybe I’m overly sensitive, but there’s something very wrong when our society tacitly accepts agents-provocateurs and then encourages the ‘identifiable’ police to beat people senselessly.

Imagine if no police showed up to the anti-police brutality demonstration?

There wouldn’t be any violence. The Black Block is imaginary, invented.

It doesn’t exist.

Call this the start of a personal campaign; I will force the SPVM to admit they use agents-provocateurs at the anti-police brutality march so as to create a riot.

They’ve never caught any members of this group, no pics, no nothing. The simple fact is that they get to inflate their budgets this way, get to buy new equipment and, once again, your civil liberties go down the shit pipes.

I wish I could simply say this is sad day, but we know the reality. This is our lives now, the People dropped the ball and our worst fears are being realized.

Here’s what the local media has to say about the annual head-stomping festival and our yearly reminder we are losing our rights living in this police state.

Sometimes I really hate this city.

PHP Freelancer

This article is a somewhat longer version of the one I published on the Forget the Box news-collective’s website. The original can be found here.

If you find the very concept of an unpaid internship thoroughly degrading an exploitative, you’re my target audience.

In my opinion, access to free education ought to be a fundamental human right. Across Canada, students have almost free public education up to the end of the secondary cycle, with some provinces offer subsidized options for post-secondary studies. Because we are a consumerist nation, because we believe paying for something is innately better than not, our society feels it would be inappropriate not to pay, something, for post-secondary education. After all, we paid nothing to go to the public primary and secondary sector, and that got us nothing. Over the years, our universities have ballooned in population while twenty-somethings enrolled live the high-consumption lifestyles of the modern student. The universities expand and market themselves aggressively so as to stimulate growth, in turn providing self-sustaining economic engines. Ask yourself what four years in university will get you, aside from the debt. The modern corporate university is as much a pyramid scheme as it is an odd kind of casino.

These days, an undergraduate degree isn’t likely to get you very far by itself. And the university has no obligation to provide you with the skills to go out and get precisely what you want career-wise. At the same time, corporations and conglomerates have no obligation to invest any amount of time or money in training you for a career in the establishment, as this is now more or less what a BA signifies in the professional world. It isn’t your specific discipline that matters, not nearly as much as the university degree simply states you have a basic level of professional competency. This is what a high-school diploma used to mean in our society. Thirty years ago universities had significantly smaller student populations, with tuition and book costs (for full time studies) not exceeding $1,000 per year. Associated costs have not kept pace with inflation and the university degree, for a variety of reasons, has largely been de-valued during this time. Compounding the issue is the fact that the current workforce has little choice but to continue working longer, as a result of the major economic crisis, so recent graduates and current student have even fewer options. And with regards to our collective debt, well, we’re told not to worry about, that we’ll eventually get good jobs to pay it off.

So is there reason, justification, for Québec students to strike, demonstrate, protest etc – yes, absolutely, but the movement would be wise to consider all its options before utilizing what I view as last ditch options to force negotiations. Public-education in Canada has been generally neglected, both by successive provincial and federal gov’ts and our society is no longer willing to appropriately fund the primary and secondary sectors. This is true across Canada. As an example: in order to pay down the massive debt and deficit of the Mulroney administration, Chretien & Martin cancelled federal transfer payments intended to be used by provincial education and healthcare ministries. As such, hospitals across Canada became overcrowded and the public sector education system took a major beating in terms of funding. Private schools and school boards have been growing in number ever since 1993, as the public lost faith in the public system. Loss of faith in the public system, which is supposed to set the social standard for education, in turn led to a nation-wide net loss of faith in what a high-school diploma could provide. This is an untenable, financially unsound situation for a nation wishing to maintain its high living standards.

Québec figured out a solution to the problem of how to provide ‘free’ social advancement for all citizens, regardless of class or region of birth, back in the late 1960s & early 1970s. As part of the Quiet Revolution, the Quebec Liberal Party established the University of Québec system – a series of public post-secondary institutions throughout the province providing low-cost, highly accessible university education. In addition, the CEGEP system was created, providing a college diploma in general or professional studies. These two public, province-wide systems were intended to do two things. First, provide a public, low-cost alternative to private or for-profit post-secondary educational institutions. Second, to assist in transforming Quebec society to build a much larger middle class, encourage our culture and ultimately to build a better society. I think the plan worked very well. The corporatization of the campus and commercializiation of the student class, in Québec inasmuch as anywhere in Canada, is a direct threat to the publicly funded means to social advancement our post-secondary system is designed to provide.

So do students in Québec have every right to be upset with any increase to tuition costs, absolutely – it is a threat to a major societal achievement that has helped build our very society. We’re more progressively minded as a direct result of our investment in education, and this benefits our society on the whole. And we should be more sensitive to the needs of students, because they are generally living on the margins of society as is, and aren’t being adequately prepared to enter the workforce. What does this say about our society as a whole?

In the end, it is the public primary and secondary sector that needs to greatest investment. We should ensure that the basic level of education is higher, and thus should endeavour to make the high-school diploma more valuable. We should also seek to increase the value of the CEGEP diploma and increase the number of vocational and professional programs offered at these institutions. Doing so would decrease the number of people flooding into the university system, which in turn would allow for a general decrease in the cost of tuition. Not to mention that we desperately need to ensure the sanctity and high societal value placed on university degrees, and by extension get people out of universities if they have no reason to be there other than the notion that it is a social expectation. We cannot allow the modern university to become a daycare for twenty-somethings.

And the Québec student movement would be wise to utilize strikes, demonstrations and the like as a last-resort measure, because such action is otherwise overly disruptive and secures no additional public support. What I’ve seen over the last ten years is a degeneration of public manifestations of social discontent into an overly aggressive and anti-social free-for-all of street theatre. More discipline ought to be exercised, and the student leadership needs to seek broad public, perhaps even pan-Canadian support. The students of Québec should not try to fight this battle by themselves, but unless the leadership is willing to look for national solidarity they won’t be able to make the case that this is an issue of significant societal importance. Blocking bridges and traffic is something you do when negotiations have proven completely fruitless, and then the movement needs to depend on public support for their aggressive actions (and yes, blocking traffic and bridges is aggressive, it is not passive).

PHP Freelancer

Justin Trudeau

Because this would invariably get blown out of proportion by the Harperites, in government and national media, let us connect straight to a reliable source. Though he’s now being lambasted for apparently supporting the independence of Québec, the point many seem to be missing is Trudeau’s qualifying statement – that things would have to be going wrong in 10,000 different ways, that Canada would have to become the ultra-right wing nightmare progressives have reason to fear in order to push Québecois back into seriously considering national independence. Trudeau’s comments seem to be indicative of his belief Canada is heading down the wrong path, and I tend to agree with him. We’ve allowed a cabal of defeatist, regressive individuals – representing a generally minority viewpoint – to take the reigns of our once internationally beloved nation, and move it instead in a direction reminiscent of all that has led to the extreme divisions in contemporary American society. We’re diving headlong into another culture war, though this one of far broader significance.

Judge for yourself;

Even if Québec never realizes its independence, the people of Canada are all free to come and go as they please. Make Canada a lesser nation, a more contemptible nation, and people will simply pack up and go. We were once a nation with open doors and open minds. Today, it’s difficult for the middle-class in Canada to keep their children here, as opportunities abroad lead young Canadians to consider opportunities on an international scale. We were once a place of refuge for all the world’s abused peoples. Today we’re a place one comes from. Unless we make Canada an attractive option for our youth, we cannot assume they will stay here. We’ll have nothing left of our nation if this worrying trend continues.

And so the Harperites would be wise to do all that they can to actually try and work to the benefit of the greater good. They’d be wise to implement plans, strategies and initiatives that benefitted the people who live in ridings that didn’t vote Tory last May. But much like Québec’s reviled Maurice Duplessis and his Union Nationale government during the Grand Noirceur, Harper and crew punish those who don’t fall in line in step with the party. I suppose I could go along with this if the party weren’t so goddam abrasive to begin with.

And then Vic Toews opened his mouth to equate not wanting to give the feds the ability to read your emails with directly supporting the production and distribution of child pornography.

If this is the state of our political discourse, I don’t want to live in this country anymore. And there’s nothing anyone could do to force me to stay here. If I want to leave my country of birth and establish myself elsewhere, it is still entirely within my right to do so.

For the moment…

Vic Toews

Vic Toews might not care much about me or any other young progressively-minded socialist up and bouncing off to some distant locale. Perhaps I’d even be doing him a favour. But if enough disenfranchised, dispirited and over indebted Canadian youth begin thinking along similar lines, then you have a real problem. And given the widening education-generation gap between today’s youth and the Baby Boomer establishment, many more young Canadians feel they are completely un-represented and consistently taken advantage of. Better opportunities and higher standards of living exist elsewhere, and, while we’re still generally welcome abroad, many young Canadians may wish to take advantage and escape the burdens of living in a nation governed by a minority of morons. Vic Toews’ statement, to say nothing of his actions, is precisely the kind of regressive, dystopian legislation that is killing Canada from within, and it is designed specifically to limit the freedoms of those most vocal and inclined to organize against the Harper regime. We’re becoming North America’s DPRK one small step at a time. By the time we realize we no longer recognize our own country, it will simply be too late; there won’t be a country worth saving.

Final note.

A recent Brock University study suggests that there is a direct link between low IQs and a personal propensity towards social-conservative politics and a bigoted perspective of other races.

Social conservatism is the politics of ignorance. If this country’s conservative government keeps appealing to the dumb, unwise, foolish and prejudiced few among us, then it really is seeking to destroy the idealist nation we once were. What neo-conservatism will mean for Canada, long-term, is not something I’m overly interested in finding out about.

Something tells me Toews will regret his highly manipulative and egregiously offensive remarks. If he is merely given the Santorum treatment he should consider himself lucky. I have a feeling his aggressive stance will be met in kind.

Wipe the hardrives Vic, you’re public enemy number one.

PHP Freelancer

Corruption Construction by Sebastien Thibault

This article was originally published by the Forget the Box news collective on January 31st 2012. While it refers to events that I commented on back in October of last year, the simple fact is that we have done virtually nothing as a society to fix the rampant corruption, collusion and nepotism at the heart of our vital construction industry. The control over this sector by the powers at be ultimately define our paralysis, impotence, as a people. If we can’t ensure those who build our metropolis can do so free from the pressures of dishonesty and organized crime, then we are figuratively sewing these traits into the very fabric of our social tapestry. Until our society decides, in unison, that they will no longer tolerate this corruption and seek to annihilate it, it will stand as the greatest obstacle to our mutual success.

***

I’m not an accountant but I can’t believe that the cost of constructing a $5 billion bridge can be done without cost to the taxpayers. Where will the initial capital come from? Who will pay for the design, materials, salaries, equipment etc?

The Tories have stated that an initially two-dollar toll will be collected and that will pay off the bridge “without cost to the taxpayer”. The toll may one day recoup the initial capital investment, but that investment will most certainly be coming out of the pockets of the taxpayers up-front, unless the fed and province feel initial capital can be covered through investment from the private sector. In that case, we need to figure out what the interest will be on such an immense loan.

All of this aside, we haven’t left the box yet; what if I were to tell you that keeping the bridge serviceable for the next decade has been pegged at only $25 million? And what if I were to further tell you that replacing the Champlain Bridge (without expansion) was estimated to only cost $1.3 billion back in 2007? Moreover, if adjusted for inflation, the cost of the Champlain Bridge in today’s money would only be about $250 million, though this figure doesn’t account for the rise of construction costs (which may be artificially high and thus kind of useless given the established corruption in the Québec construction industry).

And all of this is secondary to the main issue: what is the bridge designed for? The simple answer is that it allows about 159,000 vehicles to cross the Saint Lawrence each day and that is about as much daily traffic as it can handle. So if more than 159,000 people need to use their cars to get into the city, the city, province and fed need to find a way to get those people onto the island in a more convenient and less ecologically damaging manner.

Consider a 2009 plan prepared by the provincial government estimated to cost $4 billion to add 20km and between ten and twelve new stations to the Montréal Métro, extending the Blue and Yellow Lines, and closing the Orange Line. That plan spread the cost across the entire metropolitan region, across three cities, and would likely draw at least one hundred thousand new riders from the South Shore alone.

All of a sudden the lifespan of all the existing bridges would in turn increase, given the drop in automobile traffic across all spans, and the Champlain would no longer be in dire need of replacement. Two megaprojects of similar cost, though extending the Métro benefits far more citizens and guarantees a better dollar value for the taxpayers. This is stimulus done right because it is far-sighted, benefits a majority as opposed to a minority and further allows for stimulus in a niche domain, in this case Métro design and construction.

But when stimulus spending is viewed as a source of financial reward to party stalwarts, the project tends to be organized and designed as though it were a consumable object. And so, instead of designing a bridge to last forever, we design infrastructure to require near-constant maintenance, or take a very long time and very large budget to complete.

Every infrastructure project necessarily becomes a megaproject for the status it brings, for its marketability and political connotations. Thus, those responsible for us are tasked by the public’s failing comprehension of the purpose of government to simply demand as much money as they possibly can so that they “get what’s theirs” first and foremost.

How many Canadian voted strategically in favour of a Conservative candidate during the last election because it’s a fait accompli that Tory and otherwise strategic ridings generally get a disproportionate amount of financial stimulus money? Perhaps we’re searching for a strange equilibrium where eventually every electoral district in Canada gets a $5 billion cash infusion, though it seems as though those on the receiving end of the stimuli don’t change all too often with Tory administrations.

Ask Tony Clement how it’s paid off for the needy constituents of Toronto’s cottage country. And ask yourself if you think this is a financially tenable economic model, whether it can be sustained, or whether we keep making the same mistakes over and over again.

The astounding thing is that this kind of behaviour is lambasted as “excessive socialist spending” and “corruption disguised as socialism” when proposed by a Liberal or NDP member of parliament, and “investing in Canadian families” when proposed by the Tories. They benefit from manipulating elements of our ideology towards their own self-interests and then have the audacity to call us thieves seeking to ruin the economy to fulfill some kind of anarchistic desire to hasten the collapse of our society. Trying to untangle this misguided web of rhetoric leaves me feeling hung over, but the progressively inclined have no choice but to imbibe each time we’re confronted with the spastic outbursts and double-speak of so many glossy-eyed young Conservatives, fed talking points by master puppeteers.

A guy about my age accosted me at a restaurant about a week before the last election when he overheard me talking about my NDP leanings with several similarly minded individuals. He was clearly looking for a fight, and was agitated, as though he felt compelled to exorcise my socialist sympathies for fear of my own damnation. It was frustrating and very off-putting. But what could we do, we had to step up to the trough of life and take in a big sip of crazy.

PHP Freelancer

Brian Topp, leading NDP leadership candidate.

There’s a race on to defeat an unpopular elected official, though some (I) would call the man a place-holder. Stephen Harper has three years left in office, and if he’s anything like his Liberal and Conservative predecessors, he’ll likely jump ship before his term is up, leaving an appointed replacement to take it in the shins in 2015. If Harper is the Mulroney clone I suspect him to be, I can only hope Peter MacKay manages to at least keep his riding in the 2015 federal election, unlike so many other former party leaders fed to the dogs before him. Unless there is a major international cataclysm on par with the Second World War between now and 2015, Canada will shed the veil of apparently populist neo-Conservatism and return to our progressive, social-democratic roots. And thus the fight in 2015 will be between the NDP and the Liberals, two seasoned pugilists.

The Grits and Dippers toe to toe in 2015 – I hope I have ringside seats. Doubtless the Tories will try to re-brand themselves as the Grits are, but they will be unable to counter the momentum of nine year’s worth of widespread ideological opposition and pent-up scandal. By then the race may be to see who can read off the laundry list of Tory sins the fastest!

And so, it looks like the race in 2015 will be defined by policy, platform and the strength of individual conviction. While some believe this should be the time the NDP moves off towards the centre, Brian Topp does not. In fact, and quite unlike some other ‘leading’ candidates, he believes firmly that the NDP and its members don’t have to change who they are in order to win a federal election. Canada was built on progressive values, and Brian Topp is convinced adhering to these values is all we need to succeed.

Full disclosure: I’m volunteering for the Topp campaign. I honestly think he is the best possible candidate for the job – not so merely the job of leading the party, but of leading the nation as well. Topp is the best candidate in the field for numerous reasons, least of all his fluent bilingualism and the support of party luminaries from Ed Broadbent to Libby Davies and Roy Romanow. It’s that he’s worked tirelessly across Canada, helping NDP MPs get elected in three provinces and further being elected President of the party. He was also Jack’s choice and right hand, helping to draft the party platforms in 2006, 2008 and 2011.

I could go on, but why me when someone else has done a more exemplary job (plus I’m tired). A friend of mine going all the way back to elementary school, Mr. Shawn Katz, has written this excellent op-ed in support of Brian which neatly summarizes why you choose him to be the leader of the NDP and this country. Take a look at his website, Take Canada Back incase I haven’t convinced you yet.

Now is the time for decisive action – no more sitting on the fence. If you are a progressive or have progressive tendencies, now is the time to make your voice heard. Register to become a member today at NDP.ca and when your paper, preferential ballot arrives in the mail sometime in February, be sure to put your support behind Brian Topp. And if you’re feeling generous, be sure to make a donation at Brian Topp’s official website.

Canada’s counting on you.

PHP Freelancer