Spec Online

Situation Critical: Frazzled on the front line

As front-line workers in the overburdened long-term care system, Personal Support Workers are the first to see its problems.  Given the chaos they experience every day, they want better training standards and other professional improvements that the province, so far, is rejecting.

What do you think. Should PSWs receive upgraded training, bringing them to similar levels to other health-care workers?

Situation Critical: The crisis in long-term care

Ontario’s long-term care system is paralyzed, and failing its most vulnerable residents. More than 600 government funded homes are supposed to provide high quality, round-the-clock care to the frail elderly.  But Metroland’s special report shows seniors stuck on record wait lists, entangled in bureaucracy and subject to pressure tactics that jeopardize their rights.

What do you think? Do you have personal experience with the system? What needs to happen to address the problems outlined in the special report, which began today (Wednesday) in The Spectator and other Metroland web sites and in Metroland papers?

Suspension for the sins of a few

The Spec's Garry McKay reports:

'The University of Waterloo has suspended its football program for a year amid the biggest drug scandal in the history of Canadian university sports.

Nine players from the Waterloo football team either admitted using banned substances, tested positive or refused to take a test, the Canadian Centre for Ethics in Sports announced yesterday.

Marg McGregor, CEO of Canadian Interuniversity Sport -- the governing body for university sports in Canada -- said: "This is the most significant doping issue in CIS history and we're taking it very seriously."

McGregor and Paul Melia, president of the ethics centre, said the scandal indicates more needs to be done to police drug use among athletes. This school year, only 202 of 10,000 CIS athletes were tested for performance-enhancing drugs.'

What do you think? Did the university over-react and punish the majority of players who are not guilty of drug use? Or was the suspension the right thing to do?

TheSpec.com - Local - Football players pay for steroid scandal

Is it a subsidy or not?

The Spec's Andrew Dreschel writes:

'Hamilton Tiger-Cat president Scott Mitchell has come out swinging at council members who say the football club receives an annual $1.3 million subsidy from the City of Hamilton.

“It’s not only inaccurate, it’s dishonest,” Mitchell said.

“We’ve never received one penny from the city, ever, in any way, shape or form during Bob Young’s ownership tenure.”

The notion the Ticats are subsidized by taxpayers has become part of the fabric of the Pan Am stadium debate.

Though bandied around City Hall for years, it received serious traction when Mayor Fred Eisenberger used it in response to Young’s public rejection of the west harbour as the stadium site.

Most recently, Councillor Sam Merulla compared the Ticats to a welfare case.

But Mitchell says the $1.3 million is actually money the city spends on running Ivor Wynne Stadium, a facility it owns and rents to the Tiger-Cats.

Those operating expenses includes salaries and benefits for city employees, upkeep, building and grounds maintenance and the cost of general materials and supplies.

“The concept of this as a subsidy is erroneous, inaccurate and harmful to our business,” Mitchell said.

Merulla laughs off Mitchell’s objections. Of course the club is receiving financial backing from taxpayers, he says.

Merulla points out the Tiger-Cats receive all revenue from their games at Ivor Wynne — gate receipts, concessions, parking, advertising —  but  the city pays all operating costs from hydro to security.

“All their overhead is covered and they keep all the revenue,” says Merulla. “It’s insane.”

“If you have a restaurant, does the landlord go in there and clean up the restaurant for you and then you keep all the revenue?”

Besides picking up operating costs, Merulla say the city spends significant capital dollars to keep Ivor Wynne playable for the Tiger-Cats, the stadium’s sole tenant.  That includes close to $3 million since 2005.

Additionally, Merulla maintains the token $27,500 a year rent the Ticats pay is so deeply discounted it amounts to a free lease.'

What do you think?

Fertilizer fallout

The Spec reports:

'Hightened fears of a massive security threat to the upcoming G8 and G20 summits collapsed last night after a man who raised suspicions by buying a large amount of potentially explosive fertilizer at a Vineland garden centre identified himself to police.

Just before 10 p.m., police said they made contact with the man who bought the ammonium nitrate after appealing for the public's help in finding him at a late afternoon news conference.

Police say the man contacted the RCMP Integrated National Security Enforcement Team -- which is handling security for the G20 summit in Toronto -- shortly after it released three composite sketches of him at the 4 p.m. media event.

They said they recovered the ammonium nitrate, which can be turned into a bomb with only rudimentary skills, at two Toronto addresses.

The May 26 purchase at Vineland Growers on Jordan Road in the Town of Lincoln raised concerns when the man paid cash and didn't show identification.

Police say those concerns have ended.

"There are no suspicious circumstances surrounding the purchase of the ammonium nitrate," said RCMP Sergeant Marc LaPorte. "It is expected there will be no charges."

At the news conference held by RCMP Inspector Gord Sneddon, head of the integrated enforcement team, police said the man had falsely misrepresented himself as buying the fertilizer for a local grower to garden centre staff.

The man paid $750 for the compound and hauled it away in a rusty trailer.

Regulations require anyone who buys ammonium nitrate to be identified.'

What do you think? Was the extreme reaction reasonable, or did security forces, and the media, overreact? And what does this incident say about the wisdom of summits such as the two coming  up in Ontario?

Marketing Canada, or another boondoggle?

Torstar News Service reports:

'The Conservative government scrambled Tuesday to water down criticism around its fake lake and other faux attractions at the G-8/G20 media centre in Toronto, built at a cost of almost $2 million.

Seeing his beloved back-to-back summits turn into a laughing stock, Prime Minister Stephen Harper went on the defensive saying it was a chance to show off Canada to the world’s media.

“This is a classic attempt for us to be able to market the country. We have quotes from all kinds of people in the Ontario tourism industry including the president of that industry saying, ‘This is our chance to profile Ontario tourism to the world, we must not miss this opportunity’,” Harper told MPs.

With most reporters barred from setting foot in Muskoka – site of the G8 meeting, the federal government has instead built the “Experience Canada” exhibit in Toronto. It includes a mini-lake, a deck and cottage country backdrop complete with Muskoka chairs and canoes, borrowed from area residents. There’s also a cityscape with a skyline of office towers, a taste of Toronto’s stock exchange and a display of Canadian high-tech equipment.

But with their plans for the fake lake under fire, senior government officials went on the offensive Tuesday, hastily summoning reporters to Langevin Block – where Harper’s office is located – to defend their elaborate plans for the media centre as smart marketing.

“Our government will not apologize for marketing and promoting Canada to the entire world,” said Harper’s director of communications Dimitri Soudas.'

What do you think? Is the marketing argument sound, or is this another example of how the two summits are of questionable value?

Incumbents dole out cash

The Spec's Emma Reilly reports:

'New sidewalks. Updated playground equipment. Road repairs.

These improvements will soon be coming to your ward, courtesy of your city councillor -- and most of them will arrive just in time for October's municipal election.

Councillors voted yesterday to give themselves $241,000 each to spend on infrastructure projects of their choosing in their wards.

The work will get under way "as soon as possible," with most of it finishing up by the Oct. 25 election, said Gerry Davis, the city's general manager of public works.

But the mayor and other senior city staffers say the one-time funding has nothing to do with October's vote.

"My argument has always been to put money into infrastructure," said Mayor Fred Eisenberger. "I think it was a wise choice."

"It's the right asset at the right time in the right place," said Davis.

Marvin Ryder, a McMaster University business professor, said this fund will give incumbent councillors an advantage in this fall's municipal election. However, he believed it will be negated by the fact the money is committed to projects that would be upgraded within a couple of years.

He also said the nearly $250,000 can get eaten up quickly by sidewalk, pothole or catch basin projects.

"I think I'd be more concerned if they each got $10 million to spend or $20 million to spend," he said. "At $250,000, it really is sort of slap-a-coat-of-paint kind of money."

Most of the one-time funding comes from a provincial grant to offset social service costs. In April, city staff originally recommended creating a report outlining several options for spending the surplus money, but council voted to allocate the money immediately to infrastructure.

"We were going to come back with a report, but we never got to that stage," said Rob Rossini, the city's general manager of finance.

The most popular choice for spending among council members was sidewalk maintenance, with $1.1 million of the $3.6-million surplus going to repairs.

In the regular capital budget, $300,000 is allocated for sidewalk replacement while an additional $300,000 goes toward sidewalk maintenance. The city has an annual $145-million backlog in infrastructure spending.

All councillors, except for Terry Whitehead, chose to put at least a portion of their money toward sidewalks. Whitehead allocated $200,000 for William McCulloch Park and $41,000 on repairs to West 5th.

Councillor Robert Pasuta chose to spend $141,000 on rural road repairs, while Chad Collins allocated $20,000 to update Sam Manson Park. Eight councillors chose to spend on sidewalks alone.'

Some argue this will give already favoured incumbents an unfair advantage in this fall's municipal elections. Others say it makes ward representatives responsible for specific infrastructure decisions in their own wards. What do you think?

Liberal/NDP coalition?

Canadian Press reports:

'Michael Ignatieff says coalition governments are “perfectly legitimate” and he’d be prepared to lead one if that’s the hand Canadian voters deal him in the next election.
But the Liberal leader says it would be disrespectful to voters and damaging to his party to try to strike any deals with the NDP before voters have spoken.
Pressure has been mounting on Ignatieff in recent weeks to embrace some sort of co-operative arrangement with the NDP, a notion fuelled by tepid poll numbers for the Liberals and the example of the Conservative-Liberal Democrat coalition government installed last month in Britain.
In his first extensive comments on the issue, Ignatieff said he has no problem with the principle of coalition governments.
“Co-operation between parties to produce political and electoral stability is not illegitimate. It’s never been illegitimate, it’s part of our system,” he said, noting that coalitions have been formed in parliamentary democracies around the globe.
“But the right way to do it is to run your flag up, (opposing parties)  run their flag up, you fight like crazy, you put your choices clearly to the Canadian people, they make their choices and then you play the cards that voters deal you.”
Ignatieff insisted he still believes the Liberals can win the next election. But should no party win a majority and the numbers make it feasible for a Liberal-led coalition to provide “progressive, stable, compassionate, good government,” Ignatieff said he’d “make it work for Canadians.”

“I can make all kinds of electoral arrangements work and people should have confidence that I can. I’m a unifier, I’m not a divider.”'

What do you think about the idea of a coalition?

 

Re-routing trucks

The Spec's Emma Reilly reports:

'Truck off.

That was the message relayed to council members last Tuesday as dozens of residents spoke out about proposed truck routes in the city.

Hamilton is nearing the end of a three-year process to reorganize the way truck traffic moves through the city. The new routes, which stretch throughout Hamilton, are based on a consultant's report, community input and feedback from city staff and the police.

But striking the right balance between the desires of community members and the need to transport goods hasn't been an easy task.

Though the public works committee voted to temporarily ban trucks from several residential areas for 18 months, delegates were still concerned about the possibility of trucks driving through their neighbourhoods when alternate routes such as the Red Hill Valley Parkway are available.

On the flip side, the Ontario Trucking Association says removing those routes makes it more difficult for truckers to do their job.

At a recent public works meeting, committee members voted to ban trucks from four areas of the city -- parts of Kenilworth Avenue, Upper Ottawa Street, Concession Street, and Dundurn Street North -- for an 18-month trial period.

Council may decide to add Centennial Parkway to that list at Wednesday's meeting,.

Residents at Tuesday's meeting ranged in age from seniors to baby Colin in his father John Neary's arms. The concerns raised included escarpment erosion caused by truck vibrations, pollution, and safety issues.

David Johnson, a Mountain Brow Boulevard resident who works in the trucking industry, warned that some trucks travelling in residential areas will be carrying hazardous materials that could be disastrous in the event of an accident.

Danusia Szpaks raised concerns about the safety of a hairpin turn on Kenilworth Avenue, and the effect of traffic on Kerr House, a heritage property on Concession Street. Nurse Lillian Tymchuk outlined the adverse health effects of inhaling truck exhaust.

Jennifer Dawson presented information to council gleaned by observing the corner at Dundurn and King Streets over 10 days. The results showed 424 trucks were driving along Dundurn Street North in a 24-hour period.

"As vice-president of the Strathcona Community Council, I'm here this morning to help you find the courage to say it: truck off. Not for 18 months, but forever, " she said.

However, representatives from the Ontario Trucking Association criticized the committee after the meeting for banning trucks from the four residential areas. Spokesperson Geoff Wood said after months of consultations with the trucking industry, city staff added that amendment at the last minute.

Wood also argued the move caters to a NIMBY attitude and will ultimately create more emissions from trucks.

"You're pushing trucks to other parts of the city that may not have had them before, " he said "For some people, trucks are an evil --but they're a necessary evil."'

Council will receive and probably act on the recommendations next Wednesday. What do you think?

New copyright laws

The Canadian Press reports:

'Sweeping new federal copyright legislation would allow companies to seek damages ranging from $100 to $5,000 from people who illegally copy digital material such as games and music.

The bill creates a new legal category for personal users, separate from the previous law that lumped people and businesses together and set the same $1-million maximum penalty.

The new law would also make it illegal to pick a technological lock to move legally acquired digital material from, say, a video game or music CD to a computer.'

Do you support the new law? Will it change your behaviour? Do you think it will be effective?