I thought it was a fake headline. Does anyone read the words “Mushroom hunter 'massacre' claims 18 lives in Italy” and not think it has to be a joke? But yes, it turns out it is true. People are dying left and right in Italy right now because they are abandoning safety precautions when hunting mushrooms. At least18 people died, six of them in a 48-hour period, because they were desperate to find mushrooms in the dark and not reveal the best fungi locations. It’s not hard for me to understand, even though I don’t especially care for mushrooms, because we all have our passions in life. Some people just happen to be passionate enough about mushrooms to risk their lives to get them. I understand that passion but I think it’s crazy to risk your life for mushrooms. But there are obviously those who disagree with me. 18 people died for some mushrooms, and not even the hallucinogenic kind. We all have things in life we are willing to take risks for.
In less than two weeks I will be taking what some people view as a huge risk. I will be moving to Qatar, a tiny country located in the Middle East along the Persian Gulf, to be the editor of an English magazine. There are those who think I am crazy. There are those who have expressed those feelings out loud. Many people have asked me ‘why’? Not to get too philosophical or cliché on you or anything, but to that I say ‘why not’? Why would I turn down my dream job because it happens to be in a country that I have never been to? Why would I pass up the chance to see the world just because it might be scary at times?
I have been working towards my goal of being a magazine editor for eight years now. It really isn’t a cliché when I say it’s my dream job because it is absolutely true. Do I wish this dream could have happened in Canada or the United States? Of course, but life doesn’t work that way. I have been given an opportunity and I intend on taking it. I don’t want to have regrets.
That’s not to say it won’t be hard. There will be times it will be devastatingly hard, particularly Christmas and my birthday. I love Canada. I love my family, my friends and my pets. But sometimes you have to give up the things you love most to live your life without fear and regret. I know I will miss out on things. I hate that I will miss out on things. But I will hate myself if I don’t try. If I fail, then hopefully I learn something along the way.
I also love that I feel relatively safe here most of the time. Canada, for the most part, is a safe country. But no country is 100 per cent safe and no one can be protected all the time; that is another fact of life. The country I am moving to is also considered a safe country. It has a very low crime rate and it has only ever had one terrorist threat – a non-resident suicide bomber. Qatar will be strange and completely foreign to me, so it might feel a little scary at first. But life is not about being safe 100 per cent of the time. That is an impossible goal. I do not strive to live life safely; I aim to live life vividly and passionately. Does that make me crazy, naïve, or both? Maybe, but it also makes me happy.
I guess in a way my move to Qatar is my own personal mushroom hunt. I am following my passion into the darkness to see what can grow there. But those mushroom hunters died, you say. Yes, but what the story doesn’t tell us is how many people hunted the mushrooms and lived to tell about it. We don’t know if those who found the mushrooms and made it back to their homes safely found their lives improved or worsened. We don’t know if those who never went looking for the mushrooms in the first place regret their choice. The only way to know if you are making the right choice or not is to actually make a choice, to take action, to risk everything. A wise person once said you cannot win the lottery if you don’t buy a ticket. I’m buying my ticket, and I’m on my way. Thank you for reading.
Thursday, September 2, 2010
Thursday, August 26, 2010
Follow the Rules of the Road to End the War
For the past year I have struggled with the war between cyclists, motorists and pedestrians. I’ve never really known who to support because I’ve been in all three roles. Pedestrians run the risk of being hit by a car or a bike; cyclists have to manoeuvre around both pedestrians and cars; and motorists have to avoid hitting, and potentially killing, both cyclists and pedestrians. How can there be harmony between the three groups when there is so much at stake?
After more than a year of being torn about whose side I am on I have finally come to a conclusion – everyone needs to follow the freaking rules of the road, no matter what they are travelling on, be it legs, a bike or an SUV. Pedestrians, cyclists and motorists can get along without injury or mishap, but only if everyone follows the rules. When the rules of the road are violated there is no harmony, only chaos.
Last weekend I almost ran over a cyclist. I was turning right onto a busy road in Edmonton. It was dark out and he came out of nowhere. I started to turn my car, only to spot a man zipping up the sidewalk on his bike. He zoomed across the street, directly in front of my path without pause. He gave me a thumbs up, sarcastic, I’m sure, as if to say, ‘hey, way to drive, you idiot. Don’t you know I’m a cyclist and you should watch out for me?’ Yes, I know to watch for cyclists and pedestrians. But I also know the proper procedure for riding a freaking bike. It’s illegal to ride your bike on the sidewalk. It’s illegal not to wear a helmet (he wasn’t). It’s illegal to ride your bike across a crosswalk. Cyclists are supposed to ride in the road with the rest of traffic. Cyclists are supposed to get off their bleeping bikes at corners and walk their bikes across the road, while checking for traffic. Cyclists are supposed to watch out for cars before flying out into the road.
I know what it feels like to be a cyclist. I’ve been frustrated when a driver doesn’t share the road with me, or doesn’t slow down while driving by me. It’s hard to be the one on the bike. Cyclists, while great for the environment, are nobody’s friend. But it’s not their fault when they get in the way of cars on the road. Most cities don’t have bike lanes; small towns almost never do. When there is no bike lane, only bumpy pavement filled with speeding hunks of metal hurtling by you, the road is not an appealing option to a cyclist. So many cyclists take to the sidewalk instead. Bad move.
When cyclists take over the sidewalk, it puts pedestrians in harms way. Sidewalks are built for people to walk on, not bike on. Many of them aren’t wide enough to handle both. Cyclists move faster than the flow of traffic on a sidewalk and pedestrians can’t see cyclists coming up behind them.
Pedestrians are also good for the environment. It’s also a great way to squeeze in some light exercise. Pedestrians move at a different pace than cyclists or motorists; sometimes it’s nice to slow down, enjoy the scenery and smell the damn roses. But pedestrians are by no means perfect. They often run across the street when the blinking red hand is telling them not to; sometimes pedestrians don’t even look before leaping out into the fray. My roommate in Ottawa used to cross the street to get to the train without looking first, despite the fact that it was a very high traffic area. Her reasoning was that everyone else also crossed there after getting off the bus and that if a car did happen to come it would stop for her.
Motorists cannot be 100 per cent responsible for looking out for pedestrians, just like pedestrians cannot be expected to always know when a cyclist is coming up behind them at full speed. Cyclists must hope that every time they go out on the road a motorist won’t accidentally clip them, knocking them off their bike. My point is, and I do have one, that traffic rules were invented for a reason. Everyone – cyclists, motorists and pedestrians – need to follow the rules of the road or else they don’t work. It’s dangerous to dismiss these rules because they are the only thing organizing the chaos of the road and keeping everyone safe.
After more than a year of being torn about whose side I am on I have finally come to a conclusion – everyone needs to follow the freaking rules of the road, no matter what they are travelling on, be it legs, a bike or an SUV. Pedestrians, cyclists and motorists can get along without injury or mishap, but only if everyone follows the rules. When the rules of the road are violated there is no harmony, only chaos.
Last weekend I almost ran over a cyclist. I was turning right onto a busy road in Edmonton. It was dark out and he came out of nowhere. I started to turn my car, only to spot a man zipping up the sidewalk on his bike. He zoomed across the street, directly in front of my path without pause. He gave me a thumbs up, sarcastic, I’m sure, as if to say, ‘hey, way to drive, you idiot. Don’t you know I’m a cyclist and you should watch out for me?’ Yes, I know to watch for cyclists and pedestrians. But I also know the proper procedure for riding a freaking bike. It’s illegal to ride your bike on the sidewalk. It’s illegal not to wear a helmet (he wasn’t). It’s illegal to ride your bike across a crosswalk. Cyclists are supposed to ride in the road with the rest of traffic. Cyclists are supposed to get off their bleeping bikes at corners and walk their bikes across the road, while checking for traffic. Cyclists are supposed to watch out for cars before flying out into the road.
I know what it feels like to be a cyclist. I’ve been frustrated when a driver doesn’t share the road with me, or doesn’t slow down while driving by me. It’s hard to be the one on the bike. Cyclists, while great for the environment, are nobody’s friend. But it’s not their fault when they get in the way of cars on the road. Most cities don’t have bike lanes; small towns almost never do. When there is no bike lane, only bumpy pavement filled with speeding hunks of metal hurtling by you, the road is not an appealing option to a cyclist. So many cyclists take to the sidewalk instead. Bad move.
When cyclists take over the sidewalk, it puts pedestrians in harms way. Sidewalks are built for people to walk on, not bike on. Many of them aren’t wide enough to handle both. Cyclists move faster than the flow of traffic on a sidewalk and pedestrians can’t see cyclists coming up behind them.
Pedestrians are also good for the environment. It’s also a great way to squeeze in some light exercise. Pedestrians move at a different pace than cyclists or motorists; sometimes it’s nice to slow down, enjoy the scenery and smell the damn roses. But pedestrians are by no means perfect. They often run across the street when the blinking red hand is telling them not to; sometimes pedestrians don’t even look before leaping out into the fray. My roommate in Ottawa used to cross the street to get to the train without looking first, despite the fact that it was a very high traffic area. Her reasoning was that everyone else also crossed there after getting off the bus and that if a car did happen to come it would stop for her.
Motorists cannot be 100 per cent responsible for looking out for pedestrians, just like pedestrians cannot be expected to always know when a cyclist is coming up behind them at full speed. Cyclists must hope that every time they go out on the road a motorist won’t accidentally clip them, knocking them off their bike. My point is, and I do have one, that traffic rules were invented for a reason. Everyone – cyclists, motorists and pedestrians – need to follow the rules of the road or else they don’t work. It’s dangerous to dismiss these rules because they are the only thing organizing the chaos of the road and keeping everyone safe.
Thursday, August 19, 2010
Voter Apathy Alive and Well in Canada
I have a confession to make: I have never voted. I’ve never ticked off a name on a ballot during a municipal, provincial or federal election. I have never exercised my right to choose who makes my decisions for me for several reasons. At first, it was because I was too young to vote. No one can yell at you for not taking part in the democratic practice before your 18 birthday. It’s the law. Then I moved away soon after my 18th birthday, giving me a free pass to miss elections. I was new to the area and I had no clue I was even missing the chance to vote that year. As I got older, so did my excuses. “Not legally eligible” turned into “too much effort/don’t know squat about politics/don’t want to make an uninformed decision that will affect others lives.”
But now that I’ve spent about two years tracking local, provincial and federal politics I’ve run out of excuses. I now know enough to pick what I think is the best horse in the race. Unfortunately, many people don’t feel this way. Now, I don’t want to judge the non-voters because I was once like you. But I also want to be clear: voter apathy needs to end now because voting is one of the most important things you can do to determine your future.
As important as elections are, many people simply do not vote, for whatever reason. The importance of the vote or the size of the community doesn’t seem to factor in. Examples abound of voter apathy. In New Sarepta, 56 per cent of residents voted to dissolve the village and become a hamlet within Leduc County. However, only 134 people voted out of about 450 eligible voters. That’s a voter turnout of about 30 per cent, meaning less than one-third of New Sarepta’s population cared enough to vote on such an important issue. The same problems occur on a larger scale. According to Stats Canada, voter turnout in the 2008 national election dropped by more than five per cent, resulting in the “lowest percentage of registered voters ever recorded for a national election in Canada.”
It’s not that hard to figure out why many people don’t vote. The process of voting is intimidating and time consuming. And it can be really, really boring if you don’t know the candidates or the big issues in your area. Many people simply don’t vote because they don’t know anything about their government. Others pay attention only to federal and provincial politics while ignoring their municipal government.
Sometimes non-voters are simply apathetic about politics. Part of it certainly comes from a lack of motivation or from thinking one vote doesn’t matter. My generation is so blasé about things that Facebook is actually considering instituting a “Meh” application to go along with the application that lets you “like” someone’s status or photo with just the click of a button. Clicking is easy; voting takes a little more effort. But I don’t buy into the hype that it is just young whippersnaps who don’t give a crap about voting or politics. I think apathy spreads across generations of people who have grown disenchanted with government or never cared about it in the first place. Youth voter turnout is lower than it should be but youth show their political feelings in other ways, such as starting online groups, boycotts or petitions. One needn’t look no further than City of Leduc Alderman Dominic Mishio, who became the youngest elected official in Alberta and the youngest-ever member of City of Leduc council in 2007. I don’t doubt that many young adults like to voice their opinions about politics and things happening in their community. I just know that many of those same young adults don’t express those opinions through voting.
Voting is more than just a government-given right here in Canada. It is an essential process that determines your municipality’s course for three years. The councillors you elect represent you. They decide how your community will grow, what projects will be prioritized and not only how much taxes you will pay but how those tax dollars will be spent. It’s a big responsibility and an often thankless job. The people resilient enough to run for council must be lauded for their efforts.
With the municipal election coming up this fall (you did know it’s an election year, right?) we all have a chance to have our voices heard through the democratic process of voting.
But now that I’ve spent about two years tracking local, provincial and federal politics I’ve run out of excuses. I now know enough to pick what I think is the best horse in the race. Unfortunately, many people don’t feel this way. Now, I don’t want to judge the non-voters because I was once like you. But I also want to be clear: voter apathy needs to end now because voting is one of the most important things you can do to determine your future.
As important as elections are, many people simply do not vote, for whatever reason. The importance of the vote or the size of the community doesn’t seem to factor in. Examples abound of voter apathy. In New Sarepta, 56 per cent of residents voted to dissolve the village and become a hamlet within Leduc County. However, only 134 people voted out of about 450 eligible voters. That’s a voter turnout of about 30 per cent, meaning less than one-third of New Sarepta’s population cared enough to vote on such an important issue. The same problems occur on a larger scale. According to Stats Canada, voter turnout in the 2008 national election dropped by more than five per cent, resulting in the “lowest percentage of registered voters ever recorded for a national election in Canada.”
It’s not that hard to figure out why many people don’t vote. The process of voting is intimidating and time consuming. And it can be really, really boring if you don’t know the candidates or the big issues in your area. Many people simply don’t vote because they don’t know anything about their government. Others pay attention only to federal and provincial politics while ignoring their municipal government.
Sometimes non-voters are simply apathetic about politics. Part of it certainly comes from a lack of motivation or from thinking one vote doesn’t matter. My generation is so blasé about things that Facebook is actually considering instituting a “Meh” application to go along with the application that lets you “like” someone’s status or photo with just the click of a button. Clicking is easy; voting takes a little more effort. But I don’t buy into the hype that it is just young whippersnaps who don’t give a crap about voting or politics. I think apathy spreads across generations of people who have grown disenchanted with government or never cared about it in the first place. Youth voter turnout is lower than it should be but youth show their political feelings in other ways, such as starting online groups, boycotts or petitions. One needn’t look no further than City of Leduc Alderman Dominic Mishio, who became the youngest elected official in Alberta and the youngest-ever member of City of Leduc council in 2007. I don’t doubt that many young adults like to voice their opinions about politics and things happening in their community. I just know that many of those same young adults don’t express those opinions through voting.
Voting is more than just a government-given right here in Canada. It is an essential process that determines your municipality’s course for three years. The councillors you elect represent you. They decide how your community will grow, what projects will be prioritized and not only how much taxes you will pay but how those tax dollars will be spent. It’s a big responsibility and an often thankless job. The people resilient enough to run for council must be lauded for their efforts.
With the municipal election coming up this fall (you did know it’s an election year, right?) we all have a chance to have our voices heard through the democratic process of voting.
Thursday, August 12, 2010
Romantic Comedies Only Screw You Up if You Let Them
A recent poll in Australia shows that watching romantic comedies can ruin your love life because it raises your expectations and makes you want flowers and candy for no reason at all. In other news, grass is green and babies are cute.
Researchers polled 1,000 Australians to see if watching romantic comedies affected their romantic relationships. The results are hardly shocking. The reason behind the poll is unintelligible. Are researchers running out of things to study in Australia? Yes, the poll showed that the inevitable happy endings that take place in romantic comedies like The Notebook and 27 Dresses lead to unrealistic expectations, such as expecting flowers “just because” or believing that your partner should know what your thinking at all times without you having to tell them but who needed a poll to tell them that? The one thing researchers didn’t reveal is if gender played a role in this poll. Half of the thousand people polled thought romantic comedies inflicted disaster on real life relationships. Polls are done randomly but one would think that researchers would try to get a fairly even split of males and females to poll to reflect the larger population. Were the roughly 500 people in the poll who resented romantic comedies all female or was resentment towards movies like The Wedding Planner equally split gender-wise?
The fact that someone felt the urgent need to poll people to figure out that romantic comedies result in unrealistic romantic dreams is ridiculous. What’s even more hilarious is that the study was released by Warner Home Video at the same time the studio’s romantic comedy Valentine’s Day was released on video. Why release a study showing that people think movies like Valentine’s Day ruin their romantic lives while trying to promote a movie that is full of schmaltzy, ooey-gooey romantic plotlines? What marketing genius thought that up? Perhaps it was an attempt at reverse psychology. Hey, did you know that romantic comedies will raise your expectations and damage your relationships? But, um, watch our romantic comedy anyways, please.
These poll results should be taken with a grain of salt. I mean, can you picture life without romantic comedies? I can, and it’s an ugly, disappointing world. Life without Richard Gere sweeping Julia Roberts off her feet is a life not worth living. Besides, even if we all stopped watching romantic comedies we would still be subjected to unrealistic romantic stories. Romantic comedies are not the world’s only source of romantic overindulgence. The idea that Prince Charming will sweep us off our feet starts at an early age and builds as we grow older. Unrealistic fairy-tale endings exist in Disney movies, children’s books, romance novels, TV shows and songs. In order to avoid all happy endings you would have to go live in a cave without any traces of the outside world.
What this poll really shows us is that half the population of Australia (and probably the rest of the world too) allow themselves to be brainwashed by romantic comedies and then blame those movies for their own unrealistic expectations. Avoiding impractical love stories will not heal your relationship if it is already broken, nor will it change your personality, or your romantic hopes and dreams. This poll also demonstrates that half the people polled are able to watch Sleeping Beauty, read a Nicholas Sparks novel or listen to a Taylor Swift song without letting it warp their romantic expectations.
For the record, I love quality romantic comedies. I saw Valentine’s Day and I liked it. Was it predictable and a tad sappy? Of course. But it was also charming, light-hearted, funny and full of romantic gestures, which is all I really expect out of romantic comedies. I do not ask romantic comedies to save the world from aliens or stop global warming. I do not expect rom-coms, as they are known in the biz, to have all the answers. Romantic comedies rarely disappoint me because I know what I am getting into when I sit down in the movie theatre. The fact that romantic comedies like Valentine’s Day are usually chockfull of yummy looking men that act all romantic and say beautifully scripted things doesn’t hurt either.
If nothing else, romantic comedies are worth watching because of the rare time a rom-com turns out to be funny, moving and unpredictable. The good romantic comedies give us a few laughs, the great romantic comedies usually prompt a few tears and the best romantic comedies help us realize what we really want out of our relationships. If those movies happen to raise our expectations it is only because we are letting them.
Researchers polled 1,000 Australians to see if watching romantic comedies affected their romantic relationships. The results are hardly shocking. The reason behind the poll is unintelligible. Are researchers running out of things to study in Australia? Yes, the poll showed that the inevitable happy endings that take place in romantic comedies like The Notebook and 27 Dresses lead to unrealistic expectations, such as expecting flowers “just because” or believing that your partner should know what your thinking at all times without you having to tell them but who needed a poll to tell them that? The one thing researchers didn’t reveal is if gender played a role in this poll. Half of the thousand people polled thought romantic comedies inflicted disaster on real life relationships. Polls are done randomly but one would think that researchers would try to get a fairly even split of males and females to poll to reflect the larger population. Were the roughly 500 people in the poll who resented romantic comedies all female or was resentment towards movies like The Wedding Planner equally split gender-wise?
The fact that someone felt the urgent need to poll people to figure out that romantic comedies result in unrealistic romantic dreams is ridiculous. What’s even more hilarious is that the study was released by Warner Home Video at the same time the studio’s romantic comedy Valentine’s Day was released on video. Why release a study showing that people think movies like Valentine’s Day ruin their romantic lives while trying to promote a movie that is full of schmaltzy, ooey-gooey romantic plotlines? What marketing genius thought that up? Perhaps it was an attempt at reverse psychology. Hey, did you know that romantic comedies will raise your expectations and damage your relationships? But, um, watch our romantic comedy anyways, please.
These poll results should be taken with a grain of salt. I mean, can you picture life without romantic comedies? I can, and it’s an ugly, disappointing world. Life without Richard Gere sweeping Julia Roberts off her feet is a life not worth living. Besides, even if we all stopped watching romantic comedies we would still be subjected to unrealistic romantic stories. Romantic comedies are not the world’s only source of romantic overindulgence. The idea that Prince Charming will sweep us off our feet starts at an early age and builds as we grow older. Unrealistic fairy-tale endings exist in Disney movies, children’s books, romance novels, TV shows and songs. In order to avoid all happy endings you would have to go live in a cave without any traces of the outside world.
What this poll really shows us is that half the population of Australia (and probably the rest of the world too) allow themselves to be brainwashed by romantic comedies and then blame those movies for their own unrealistic expectations. Avoiding impractical love stories will not heal your relationship if it is already broken, nor will it change your personality, or your romantic hopes and dreams. This poll also demonstrates that half the people polled are able to watch Sleeping Beauty, read a Nicholas Sparks novel or listen to a Taylor Swift song without letting it warp their romantic expectations.
For the record, I love quality romantic comedies. I saw Valentine’s Day and I liked it. Was it predictable and a tad sappy? Of course. But it was also charming, light-hearted, funny and full of romantic gestures, which is all I really expect out of romantic comedies. I do not ask romantic comedies to save the world from aliens or stop global warming. I do not expect rom-coms, as they are known in the biz, to have all the answers. Romantic comedies rarely disappoint me because I know what I am getting into when I sit down in the movie theatre. The fact that romantic comedies like Valentine’s Day are usually chockfull of yummy looking men that act all romantic and say beautifully scripted things doesn’t hurt either.
If nothing else, romantic comedies are worth watching because of the rare time a rom-com turns out to be funny, moving and unpredictable. The good romantic comedies give us a few laughs, the great romantic comedies usually prompt a few tears and the best romantic comedies help us realize what we really want out of our relationships. If those movies happen to raise our expectations it is only because we are letting them.
Thursday, August 5, 2010
Stop Beating a Dead Horse
Just when it looked like Wildrose Alliance leader Danielle Smith would win the hearts of all Albertans through the sole virtue of not being Premier Ed Stelmach, Smith opened her big mouth on an issue so contentious I haven’t touched it until now. That’s right; she spoke out about the number one hot-button topic in the central region - Edmonton’s City Centre Airport.
Smith held a press conference at City Centre Airport Friday, July 30, to announce that she believes a plebiscite should be held to decide whether or not to close the airport. “We do not believe that the case has been made for closure of the airport,” Smith said during the press conference. “And that’s why we need to have the full debate. If there is good reason for the airport to be closed ... then I have no doubt they’ll be able to make that case in a full and open referendum debate.”
Edmonton city council previously voted 10-3 in favour of shutting down the airport. Still, airport junkies have refused to let the issue die. The vote, which should be the final say in a long drawn-out fight, is not the ultimate word in some people’s minds. Council voted on this issue last summer, after a lot of heated arguments and juvenile tactics occurred on both sides of the airport runway. However, to this day there are groups lobbying for the airport to stay open. Those who support the airport’s closure are mostly mum, probably because they’ve already won this war. No need to beat a dead horse.
It is one thing for Edmontonians to argue about the airport. They are allowed to stick up for whatever they believe is the best move. They live there. Smith does not. Sure, she owns property in Edmonton and pays municipal taxes but doesn’t actually reside here. She is not an Edmontonian. Smith is also not a member of Edmonton city council. That’s probably why Edmonton mayor Stephen Mandel stuck it to her in the Edmonton Journal. Mandel basically said that if he wanted a Calgarian to tell him how to run his city, he would ask. And trust me, he’s not asking. He’s furious. I don’t blame him. The city centre airport could very well be his Achilles’ heel in the upcoming municipal election, despite his tenure as a relatively popular mayor. In life, and especially in politics, there are issues that divide people. The airport is one of those issues. And it could very well divide voters, which is why Smith shouldn’t have pushed herself into the middle of the issue. Does she want to be the next premier of Alberta? Then she shouldn’t risk alienating half the voters in Edmonton. Or, if Edmonton city council is any indicator, Smith shouldn’t risk ticking off a ratio of 10 Edmontonians for every three residents she will please.
Then there’s the rest of the province. The Internet is already full of anonymous people speculating that Smith’s comments about the airport are actually an attempt to kill Edmonton’s downtown revitalization so that Calgary will be seen as the better city. Smith will, of course, always be the “evil Calgarian” to many Edmontonians. To others, she will be seen as the woman who saves Alberta from stuffy Premier Stelmach. But her popularity will spiral if she continues to stick her nose where it doesn’t belong.
I’m undecided on whether City Centre Airport should stay open. I really don’t think it’s my issue, since I don’t live in Edmonton. City Centre Airport is certainly not “my airport,” as many signs suggested during the first wave of protests against closure last summer. My airport is the Edmonton International Airport because, duh, why would I drive the extra distance to City Centre Airport? Plus my private jet is currently being painted so I am forced to fly with the unwashed masses. But that’s beside the point. I may never pick a side in the great airport debate but I will always staunchly insist that the fate of the airport lies in the hands of Edmontonian residents, as represented by the councillors they elected. Council already made their decision in a democratic way. That being said, if enough Edmontonians insist that they want to be able to vote on the airport issue through a plebiscite, then we should allow that to happen, not to make Smith happy but to satisfy the complaints of the whiny few who refuse to listen to the answer they are given the first time around. But every person who votes in the plebiscite should be forced to sign a waiver stating that they will accept the results and then Let. It. Go.
Smith held a press conference at City Centre Airport Friday, July 30, to announce that she believes a plebiscite should be held to decide whether or not to close the airport. “We do not believe that the case has been made for closure of the airport,” Smith said during the press conference. “And that’s why we need to have the full debate. If there is good reason for the airport to be closed ... then I have no doubt they’ll be able to make that case in a full and open referendum debate.”
Edmonton city council previously voted 10-3 in favour of shutting down the airport. Still, airport junkies have refused to let the issue die. The vote, which should be the final say in a long drawn-out fight, is not the ultimate word in some people’s minds. Council voted on this issue last summer, after a lot of heated arguments and juvenile tactics occurred on both sides of the airport runway. However, to this day there are groups lobbying for the airport to stay open. Those who support the airport’s closure are mostly mum, probably because they’ve already won this war. No need to beat a dead horse.
It is one thing for Edmontonians to argue about the airport. They are allowed to stick up for whatever they believe is the best move. They live there. Smith does not. Sure, she owns property in Edmonton and pays municipal taxes but doesn’t actually reside here. She is not an Edmontonian. Smith is also not a member of Edmonton city council. That’s probably why Edmonton mayor Stephen Mandel stuck it to her in the Edmonton Journal. Mandel basically said that if he wanted a Calgarian to tell him how to run his city, he would ask. And trust me, he’s not asking. He’s furious. I don’t blame him. The city centre airport could very well be his Achilles’ heel in the upcoming municipal election, despite his tenure as a relatively popular mayor. In life, and especially in politics, there are issues that divide people. The airport is one of those issues. And it could very well divide voters, which is why Smith shouldn’t have pushed herself into the middle of the issue. Does she want to be the next premier of Alberta? Then she shouldn’t risk alienating half the voters in Edmonton. Or, if Edmonton city council is any indicator, Smith shouldn’t risk ticking off a ratio of 10 Edmontonians for every three residents she will please.
Then there’s the rest of the province. The Internet is already full of anonymous people speculating that Smith’s comments about the airport are actually an attempt to kill Edmonton’s downtown revitalization so that Calgary will be seen as the better city. Smith will, of course, always be the “evil Calgarian” to many Edmontonians. To others, she will be seen as the woman who saves Alberta from stuffy Premier Stelmach. But her popularity will spiral if she continues to stick her nose where it doesn’t belong.
I’m undecided on whether City Centre Airport should stay open. I really don’t think it’s my issue, since I don’t live in Edmonton. City Centre Airport is certainly not “my airport,” as many signs suggested during the first wave of protests against closure last summer. My airport is the Edmonton International Airport because, duh, why would I drive the extra distance to City Centre Airport? Plus my private jet is currently being painted so I am forced to fly with the unwashed masses. But that’s beside the point. I may never pick a side in the great airport debate but I will always staunchly insist that the fate of the airport lies in the hands of Edmontonian residents, as represented by the councillors they elected. Council already made their decision in a democratic way. That being said, if enough Edmontonians insist that they want to be able to vote on the airport issue through a plebiscite, then we should allow that to happen, not to make Smith happy but to satisfy the complaints of the whiny few who refuse to listen to the answer they are given the first time around. But every person who votes in the plebiscite should be forced to sign a waiver stating that they will accept the results and then Let. It. Go.
Wednesday, July 28, 2010
Playing the Blame Game
Something has gone very, very wrong in the Town of Calmar. About two years ago someone discovered a leaking well near the new elementary school. The well, which had been abandoned to the standards of the day, was seeping sweet gas into the earth. This well was out in an open space and was dealt with fairly quickly. But the town’s problems did not end there. Two more wells were found to be leaking, one of them in a park and the other in the new Evergreen Crescent subdivision. As time went on, more wells would be found. Ed Melesko, Director of Public Works for the Town of Calmar, would later estimate there were a total of 22 abandoned wells in the town. Town Manager Kathy Murphy recently bumped that number up to 26 abandoned wells during the July town meeting. Only three of the wells were leaking but that was enough to cause more trouble than anyone could ever have imagined for Calmar. After all, it’s Calmar - a sleepy, drive-through town where young couples start families and elderly couples retire. This is not a town where people get knifed on the street. Bad thing don’t happen there. Until they do. For residents and town council, the biggest questions still remain: who is to blame and what do we do now?
The wells were originally drilled by Texaco Canada. The wells were abandoned to the standards of the day in the 1950’s and 1960’s. Imperial Oil took over Texaco Canada in 1989 and became the licensed owners of the wells.
Under Alberta law, once a well has been abandoned for a certain period it can be taken off a land title. That’s how a subdivision got built on top of a leaking well. No one officially knew it was there and no one bothered to call the Energy Resources Conservation Board before they started digging. There is evidence to suggest that the developer did find the well and ignored it. That developer has now gone out of business, so no one can officially blame (i.e. sue) him. The Town of Calmar officially has no authority when it comes to wells. Town council is also not allowed to supersede another level of government, meaning they can’t tell the provincial or federal government what to do. Many residents are blaming council for not having all the answers, for not being able to magically fix this situation. But council technically can’t do much. Council met with Imperial Oil executives and MLA Diana McQueen to try to find solutions. So far, no solutions have been offered, at least not any that have satisfied residents. But the town has technically done nothing wrong and so they cannot be officially blamed.
It’s hard to know who to blame for this mess. No laws have been broken. Alberta law allows for this to happen. And that’s why it did. Several residents, mainly those who stand to lose thousands of dollars when they sell their homes to Imperial Oil so the leaking well in their neighbourhood can be re-abandoned, have cried out for regulations that would require abandoned wells to be identified on land titles. This is not a crazy request. It seems to be a rather simple request, one that, if done in the past, could have saved a lot of people a lot of trouble, time and money. Companies like Imperial Oil surely do not want the headache of having to deal with the discovery of leaking abandoned wells every year in different areas as other communities discover leaking wells in their own backyards, as they surely will. This situation is not just happening in Calmar. Calmar simply had the misfortune of being the first community to be outed as a centre for secret leaking wells and the subsequent fallout. During the next decade, there will surely be more communities like Calmar throughout Alberta. And these communities will all have the same questions as Calmar does right now. Who is to blame and what do we do now?
Right now, residents can’t do much but try to move on with their lives, as hard as that might be. But the one thing that we can all do, that all Albertans should do, is lobby the provincial government for stricter regulations regarding abandoned wells. All abandoned wells should have to remain on land titles forever. Legislation should be put in place outlining a protocol for what should been done in situations like this one, including how compensation for homeowners affected should be calculated. The provincial government needs to take immediate action to put in place laws that will not only help homeowners affected by leaking abandoned wells but that will also prevent these kinds of disasters from happening in the future. Otherwise, the Alberta government will be the only ones left to blame.
The wells were originally drilled by Texaco Canada. The wells were abandoned to the standards of the day in the 1950’s and 1960’s. Imperial Oil took over Texaco Canada in 1989 and became the licensed owners of the wells.
Under Alberta law, once a well has been abandoned for a certain period it can be taken off a land title. That’s how a subdivision got built on top of a leaking well. No one officially knew it was there and no one bothered to call the Energy Resources Conservation Board before they started digging. There is evidence to suggest that the developer did find the well and ignored it. That developer has now gone out of business, so no one can officially blame (i.e. sue) him. The Town of Calmar officially has no authority when it comes to wells. Town council is also not allowed to supersede another level of government, meaning they can’t tell the provincial or federal government what to do. Many residents are blaming council for not having all the answers, for not being able to magically fix this situation. But council technically can’t do much. Council met with Imperial Oil executives and MLA Diana McQueen to try to find solutions. So far, no solutions have been offered, at least not any that have satisfied residents. But the town has technically done nothing wrong and so they cannot be officially blamed.
It’s hard to know who to blame for this mess. No laws have been broken. Alberta law allows for this to happen. And that’s why it did. Several residents, mainly those who stand to lose thousands of dollars when they sell their homes to Imperial Oil so the leaking well in their neighbourhood can be re-abandoned, have cried out for regulations that would require abandoned wells to be identified on land titles. This is not a crazy request. It seems to be a rather simple request, one that, if done in the past, could have saved a lot of people a lot of trouble, time and money. Companies like Imperial Oil surely do not want the headache of having to deal with the discovery of leaking abandoned wells every year in different areas as other communities discover leaking wells in their own backyards, as they surely will. This situation is not just happening in Calmar. Calmar simply had the misfortune of being the first community to be outed as a centre for secret leaking wells and the subsequent fallout. During the next decade, there will surely be more communities like Calmar throughout Alberta. And these communities will all have the same questions as Calmar does right now. Who is to blame and what do we do now?
Right now, residents can’t do much but try to move on with their lives, as hard as that might be. But the one thing that we can all do, that all Albertans should do, is lobby the provincial government for stricter regulations regarding abandoned wells. All abandoned wells should have to remain on land titles forever. Legislation should be put in place outlining a protocol for what should been done in situations like this one, including how compensation for homeowners affected should be calculated. The provincial government needs to take immediate action to put in place laws that will not only help homeowners affected by leaking abandoned wells but that will also prevent these kinds of disasters from happening in the future. Otherwise, the Alberta government will be the only ones left to blame.
Wednesday, July 21, 2010
It’s a Pretty, Pretty World with No Shortage of Rainbows or News
Recently it has been brought to my attention that I sometimes tend to be a negative person, particularly when writing my weekly editorial. It should sadden me that the public perception of me is that I am all dark and twisty, or, as one reader put it, “whiny”. But really, I’m cool with it. I kind of even get a kick out of it.
You see, this perception of Sydnee Bryant is not entirely accurate. Real Sydnee (as in, not your editorial muse but the person who generally types her columns on a bright pink laptop that would seem more at home in Barbie’s dream house than it would an office) is quite chipper. Perky, even. Sure, my level of bright, cheery sunshiny-ness has diminished somewhat over the years (at university a classmate asked me if I had been a cheerleader in high school. I informed him that while my high school did not have a cheerleading squad, if we had I sooo would have been captain! No one has asked me that question post-university) but I like to think I am not a dreary, drab person. I like rainbows, fluffy kittens and chick flicks, and I’m proud of it. Many of my accessories are pink, the brighter, the better. I can dredge up excited shrieks of “omigod!!!!” as well as the next girl if the occasion warrants it. My long, drawn out point is I’m a girly-girl, and quite a cheerful one at that.
But that’s regular Sydnee. Editorial Sydnee is quite different. Editorial Sydnee gets mean. She hates exclamation marks. She would never think to use a smiley-face emoticon in her writing because a) it is simply not professional, and b) it would look kind of stupid. Editorial Sydnee gets her jollies from politicians messing up, funding cuts to important programs and train wrecks because those are the things that make for good news. These are the things that most people tend to avoid hearing about and pretend didn’t happen. Most people tune out any news of slashed budgets and constitution violations because it bums them out. Most people call this “voter apathy.” I call it voter avoidance. When bad things happen, people usually just don’t want to know. Unless bad news involves a sex scandal, people tend to bury their heads in the proverbial sand.
But people need to know when trains derail and political parties screw over the little people because it affects their lives whether or not they pay attention to it. It’s my job as a reporter and editorialist to ensure that people know what’s going on in the world, no matter how ugly it is.
However, I will leave you with some awesome, cheerful news as a favour to all of you, my dear friends, for putting up with the not-so-cheerful editorials. It’s involves one of my favourite subjects: nail polish. A company called Creative Nail Designs has created a nail polish that actually dries instantaneously. Male readers, this probably means nothing to you. But for those of us who like our nails to be pretty year-round, this news probably resulted in many “omigod!!!!” shrieks. The polish, known as Shellac, has now come to Alberta. Basically, the manicurist applies the base coat, two coats of Shellac polish and a top coat, as per usual. But in between coats the nails are put under a UV lamp, like the ones used for gel nails. This eliminates drying time, making the polish literally smudge-free from the second your manicure or pedicure is complete. No more time wasted sitting perfectly still while you wait for your nails to dry, only to smudge them the second you attempt pet a kitty or grab your keys. I can’t tell you how many nights I’ve spent on my couch waiting for my nails to dry, only to ruin them the second I decide my nails must be dry by now. Of course, I’m pretty chipper so I never let this ruin my day or anything.
This new Shellac nail stuff truly is the breakthrough of the century. Never mind that Canadian researchers found an anti-AIDS treatment this week or that an American ad campaign is encouraging people not to travel to Alberta because of our oil and gas industry, threatening to cripple our tourism industry. Who wants to hear about that stuff? I’m so glad I finally have something to talk about other than war, the crumbling economy and the upcoming municipal elections. Aren’t you glad I’ve filled you in on what’s truly important this week?
Yeah, I thought so.
You see, this perception of Sydnee Bryant is not entirely accurate. Real Sydnee (as in, not your editorial muse but the person who generally types her columns on a bright pink laptop that would seem more at home in Barbie’s dream house than it would an office) is quite chipper. Perky, even. Sure, my level of bright, cheery sunshiny-ness has diminished somewhat over the years (at university a classmate asked me if I had been a cheerleader in high school. I informed him that while my high school did not have a cheerleading squad, if we had I sooo would have been captain! No one has asked me that question post-university) but I like to think I am not a dreary, drab person. I like rainbows, fluffy kittens and chick flicks, and I’m proud of it. Many of my accessories are pink, the brighter, the better. I can dredge up excited shrieks of “omigod!!!!” as well as the next girl if the occasion warrants it. My long, drawn out point is I’m a girly-girl, and quite a cheerful one at that.
But that’s regular Sydnee. Editorial Sydnee is quite different. Editorial Sydnee gets mean. She hates exclamation marks. She would never think to use a smiley-face emoticon in her writing because a) it is simply not professional, and b) it would look kind of stupid. Editorial Sydnee gets her jollies from politicians messing up, funding cuts to important programs and train wrecks because those are the things that make for good news. These are the things that most people tend to avoid hearing about and pretend didn’t happen. Most people tune out any news of slashed budgets and constitution violations because it bums them out. Most people call this “voter apathy.” I call it voter avoidance. When bad things happen, people usually just don’t want to know. Unless bad news involves a sex scandal, people tend to bury their heads in the proverbial sand.
But people need to know when trains derail and political parties screw over the little people because it affects their lives whether or not they pay attention to it. It’s my job as a reporter and editorialist to ensure that people know what’s going on in the world, no matter how ugly it is.
However, I will leave you with some awesome, cheerful news as a favour to all of you, my dear friends, for putting up with the not-so-cheerful editorials. It’s involves one of my favourite subjects: nail polish. A company called Creative Nail Designs has created a nail polish that actually dries instantaneously. Male readers, this probably means nothing to you. But for those of us who like our nails to be pretty year-round, this news probably resulted in many “omigod!!!!” shrieks. The polish, known as Shellac, has now come to Alberta. Basically, the manicurist applies the base coat, two coats of Shellac polish and a top coat, as per usual. But in between coats the nails are put under a UV lamp, like the ones used for gel nails. This eliminates drying time, making the polish literally smudge-free from the second your manicure or pedicure is complete. No more time wasted sitting perfectly still while you wait for your nails to dry, only to smudge them the second you attempt pet a kitty or grab your keys. I can’t tell you how many nights I’ve spent on my couch waiting for my nails to dry, only to ruin them the second I decide my nails must be dry by now. Of course, I’m pretty chipper so I never let this ruin my day or anything.
This new Shellac nail stuff truly is the breakthrough of the century. Never mind that Canadian researchers found an anti-AIDS treatment this week or that an American ad campaign is encouraging people not to travel to Alberta because of our oil and gas industry, threatening to cripple our tourism industry. Who wants to hear about that stuff? I’m so glad I finally have something to talk about other than war, the crumbling economy and the upcoming municipal elections. Aren’t you glad I’ve filled you in on what’s truly important this week?
Yeah, I thought so.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
