By Anne Jardine

One of the most unusual election events of 2015 was sponsored by the Mir Centre for Peace and the Citizens for Climate Action, on September 16 at Nelson United Church, and attended by about 150 people.

This forum was not a collection of pre-disclosed obvious questions and canned answers, but a participatory discussion process with candidate responses generated by the flow of the conversation, guided by Randy Janzen, and Jan Inglis, Mir representatives and Laura Sacks, a Citizens for Climate spokesperson, and moderated by David Boyd of Nelson United Church.

Conservative candidate David Wilks did not attend, nor did Libertarian Christina Yahn (now removed from the race), but the three candidates who did attend – Green Partyʼs Bill Green, Liberal Don Johnston, and New Democrat Wayne Stetski, proved to be insightful, and well informed on the issues.

Many of the questions were generated by small group discussions among the whole assembly – a noisy, messy process that resulted a range of themes from food and water security to sanctuary for climate refugees, national and world poverty, millennium development goals, co-operative policy making structures for effective government, First Nations treaties security and reconciliation, green house gas emissions standards and the Paris Conference on Climate in December, Canada’s role as a developed nation in an unstable world, military presence versus peacemaker, free trade treaties, renewable energy, transition plans for green economy, proportional representation, the role of the MP as representative for the region, and more.

Many of these topics do not get meaningful media coverage because they are too complicated for snappy sound bites, but the people attending this forum were bold enough to bring them up for discussion, and the candidates turned out to be thoughtful, responsive, and inspired by the freedom to develop and test out their ideas in such a setting. There were moments of clash between candidates on some the topics, especially around carbon tax and cap and trade, financial and incentives for green innovation.

One controversial suggestion was to bring in the Tobin Tax, a .01 percent tax on all bank transactions. Money would go into a poverty elimination plan. Bank of Canada could implement this as a pilot project to see if it could make a difference to poverty in Canada, and if so, the World Bank might be persuaded to adopt it.

The meeting was full of ideas leading in diverse directions, but it remained civil and respectful. Sometimes party line thinking was displayed, but it was not indulged, and listeners and candidates themselves would not hesitate to dismiss simplistic talking points. The event was a very intense two-and-a-half hours long, but at the end participants were not exhausted, but excited. To develop a depth of policy suggestions, the meeting should have been a two-and-a-half day or weeklong conference – part of the training for all candidates seeking national elected office. If prospective MPs were to learn how to interact with their constituents in such a lively, open and non-partisan way, democracy and policy-making would be the better for it.

The three candidates had their own conversation when the discussion breakout occurred. The big question that they posed back to the assembly was: “What would you like Canada to be known for?”

These excerpts are paraphrased from statements made by the candidates for Kootenay-Columbia Member of Parliament. They are not exact quotes – they have been pulled from notes taken at Peace and Security Forum on September 16.

Don Johnston (Liberal Candidate) Canada is currently seen as an ideologically-driven country that tends to simplify everything into good guys and bad guys. But the world is not simple black and white. A Liberal government would change our direction bring it back to the Lester Pearson vision of Canada as peacemaker, mediator, intelligent convener.

Bill Green (Green Candidate) I learned about cultural differences in Papua, New Guinea and working with Haitian refugees, and here in Canada, I have worked extensively with indigenous cultures. Differences are important in defining identities and respect for differences is what has made Canada great. That respect is being eroded, and it must be restored.

Wayne Stetski (New Democratic Candidate) Canada was once regarded as a leader amongst the developed countries of the world. Under the Harper government, that leadership role has dwindled. Canada is 58th out of 61 developed nations on climate change action. Canada has muzzled its scientists, ignored Kyoto emissions targets, and is now seen as an obstructionist foot dragger. We must return to a leadership role.

Christina Yehn (Libertarian Candidate) From a written statement submitted to the forum: We must get out of our participation in wars. We must immediately end our aggression and move to a humanitarian role. We must champion green spaces, gardens, green autos, green energy, innovation.

Randy Janzen (Mir Centre Representative) We have spent millions on military and security forces fighting the war on terrorism. Has the money been well spent? How has it served to improve peace and security, and how is it affecting climate change? What is your vision?

I would like you, as candidates to try to connect the dots, rely less on solutions based on tradition, old paradigms, and fear.

Bill Green (G) Justice is the most important lens through which to see our future. Priorities must be reconciliation with First Nations and an end to poverty, both domestically and in the world, but start here at home. Canadian government has no national poverty strategy. On the world stage, peace can only work within a strong framework of international law. Canadaʼs role in the UN has diminished. The Harper government has had little regard or respect for the work of the UN. It is shameful that Canada can no longer exert a positive influence as a member of the UN Security Council. In terms of our national profile, we should have a ministry of Peace and Security.

Wayne Stetski (NDP) Security starts at home with a strong and just society. We must make an end to poverty, an end to homelessness, and an end to violence against women. People have a right to be safe and feel safe. Security does not come from Bill C- 51. We cannot assume that refugees fleeing war are automatically secret terrorists. We need to make people welcome in Canada, including our own young people by developing green and meaningful opportunities. Internationally, we must get out of combat situations and work to end conflicts. When we engage in war, we end up inviting more war.

Don Johnston (Lib) We need to take responsibilities for our issues at home. Domestic poverty is a disgrace. We should not have children in Canada going hungry. We are one of the most fortunate and wealthy countries in the world. There is no excuse for the way we shame and blame our poor. On the larger scene, we know that global poverty has contributed to climate change. The goal of sending .7% of our GDP in foreign aid has never been realized. In fact it has dropped from .45% to a shameful .027% under the Harper government. We are a marginal voice in world poverty discussions. We need to be much more involved in global conversations on poverty and on climate issues.

Bill Green (G) – The .7 was part of the UN Millennium Development Goals set in 200- 2001 which were supposed to be fully achieved by 2015. In this, Canada has been a miserable failure. CIDA is no longer a stand-alone development agency. It is now all about selling solutions and Canadian technology to poor countries. We need to bring CIDA back, not tie it to corporate agendas. And we need to set limits on the profits of big money and see more investments in ending poverty. We could adopt the Tobin Tax. This is a .05% tax on banking transactions worldwide. Think what an effect that money would have on poverty.

Don Johnston (Lib) – I lived in the revolution in Ethiopia… In that time Canada changed its Department of Foreign Affairs into a department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade. This was a bad move. It tied all Canadaʼs international humanitarian aid to a Most Favoured Nation status and free trade arrangements. The Harper government does not care about poverty or law at all. A Liberal Government would value and respect the role of the UN and take more cooperative leadership on the world stage.

Wayne Stetski (NDP) – Actions come from values. The way Canada acts in the world context is guided by the values we hold. The Harper government has strayed from the values that I think most Canadians hold. They have dismantled many of the structures and institutions we have created. I would like to see us build, not destroy. In a specific example, I would like to see Canada return to a respectful treaty process with our First Nations. That would do a great deal to improve security here in Canada. And that principle, those values would extend outward to our relations with the world too. I would like to see all international treaties respect the signatories, their human rights and their sovereignty.

Randy Janzsen (Mir Centre) – How would your platform address the destructive and abusive practices of Canadian Extractive Industries?

Wayne Stetski (NDP) – Any trade agreement going forward would have specific reference to protection of the environment. It comes back to values. Some of our private companies do not represent Canadaʼs human rights and our environmental values. Although we have no way to force companies to respect our Canadian values when they operate in other countries, we can work with international agencies such as the UN to devise standards of practice.

Don Johnston (Lib) – I think there is much more we can do on the ground. We need to bring CIDA back and get it working with local watchdog NGOs in the countries where our mining and forest industries are seeking to invest.

Bill Green (G) – Mining companies must be made to have social responsibility both in Canada and overseas. We can adopt a concept of ‘prior informed consent,’ which would give the nation where the mining would be carried out a full disclosure of the proposal and the right to be part of the planning and implementation of the project before it gets a green light to go in.

Laura Sacks (Citizens for Climate Action) – We have seen years of talk – everything from denial to despair on the issue of Climate Change. While all this talking continues, we have seen an increase in freak storms, floods, heat waves, wild fires, and droughts and water shortages. If we donʼt act to slow or reverse climate change we will have millions more climate refugees in the coming decade. In the Paris Climate Conference in December, what will your party do in terms of policy to meet climate change goals?

Don Johnston (Lib) – We would BE THERE! Our provinces are leading the way. Ontario and Quebec have recently adopted some tough new laws on greenhouse gas emissions, and carbon reduction policies. These could be a starting point on a national framework, we need to be working together more with provinces before the Paris Conference.

Bill Green (G) – Elizabeth May will be there no matter who wins the election. She and the Green Party are determined that Canada must be a leader, instead of a laggard. We have developed a concept of Carbon Fee and Dividend that will be much more effective than cap and trade or straight carbon tax. The Carbon Fee is a science-based levy on the carbon content of fossil fuels – the source of 72% of our GHG emissions. This would set a clear price on carbon pollution and give producers and consumers the incentive to change the technologies and habits that have resulted in global warming. The fee would be levied on fossil fuels at source. This would ultimately mean higher prices to consumers for the final product. The benefit of the carbon fee is that both producers and consumers will have clear incentives to reduce reliance on fossil fuels. For example, local food, with low or no transportation costs subject to the carbon fee, would have a price advantage in local markets. The Fee and Dividend system would raise substantial revenues from polluters, which would be returned to the citizens of Canada in a form of a per capita dividend payment distributed to all Canadians. This initiative would have a built-in progressive feature. For Canadians with lower incomes and those who conserved more, this equal payment would be a significantly higher percentage of their total income and greater than what they spent on goods whose prices increased because of the carbon fee: these Canadians would actually make money on the carbon dividend.

Wayne Stetski (NDP) – We believe that people have the right to live in a clean environment. Air and water are essential to human life. They are not commodities. The Paris Conference needs to affirm them as human rights. Canada must get in there and advocate for world-wide research and development funding on green technologies. And most importantly we must not just agree to, but actually adhere to international standards on greenhouse gas emissions and carbon reduction. The Harper Government betrayal of the Kyoto Accord is an international embarrassment. The NDPʼs cap-and-trade system would put a clear market price on carbon use and the revenue generated by that cap-and-trade system would be used to re-invest in the future of our green energy sector. There are a lot of best practices and policies around the world, and we have to learn from them. In Paris, we should not let ideologies or partisanship entirely guide our deliberations, but remember our Canadian and human values and be open to adopting protocols that will benefit the world and the climate.

Bill Green (G) – I would like to add that “cap and trade,” which is the NDP current approach is much too loose and would allow too much leeway to the corporations. The Green Partyʼs Fee & Dividend is the best carbon reduction policy.

Don Johnston (Lib) – We have a proposal for Green Bonds and tax breaks for Green innovation. Green Bonds will make green infrastructure projects more attractive to investors by offering loan guarantees, reducing financing costs and risk, and bundling projects into attractive offerings for investors. A Green Bonds concept could be adopted by the World Bank.

Wayne Stetski (NDP) As a world, we have to take a closer look at agriculture industries as heavy contributors to climate change. Not just the transportation costs of food but the actual growing and production costs to the environment and ultimately to the climate. The issue of food security is very connected with the climate change.

Jan Inglis (Mir Centre) As citizens, we too often sit back and let experts have their say on what is important. But we are not going to settle for that passive approach tonight. This is our democracy section of the evening. Please take a brief stretch and then discuss in small groups of three or four people and come up with a specific question for the candidates on the future of how Canada deals with peace, security, and climate change.

Candidates, talk amongst your selves in your own discussion group. What questions do you have for us on peace, security and climate?

THESE QUESTIONS CAME FROM THE CANDIDATES:

– What can we do to empower communities to invest in the green economy, and how should the government support local investment in green energy options?

– Carbon pricing: which way should we go? Should it be revenue neutral or is there a need for government to use the money to invest in the green economy?

– We know young people are really concerned about the environment and social justice, but how can how we involve them in politics?

– What do you want Canada to be known for? (This was the one they considered their most important question.)

HERE ARE QUESTIONS GENERATED FROM THE ASSEMBLY AND VERY BRIEF ANSWERS FROM THE CANDIDATES:

Q – What would you like to see as the Paris Conference priority?

All three candidates would like to see standards and timelines to achieve a substantial carbon consumption/greenhouse gas emission reduction target – 80% of the 1990 level.

All three candidates would like to a special commissioner on world climate change.

Q – What should be done about water security?

Don Johnston (Lib) – A lot needs to be done. I think we should start with restoration of the Navigable Waters Act.

Bill Green (G) – Declare access to safe drinking water as a world-wide human right. Also Canada must have the right to protect its water.

Wayne Stetski (NDP) – All future treaties, be they with First Nations or with foreign nations, must include provisions to protect water as a public resource, not a commodity. Restore the Environmental Protection Act.

Q – What will you do as MP to stand up for our right as your constituents to be represented?

All three candidates agreed that an MPʼs first job is to represent the riding. They would fight to reduce the power of the PM to whip votes of the caucus. All three oppose the practice of omnibus legislation.

Q – Will you step aside to elect the most likely candidate to defeat David Wilks, as determined by pre-election polls?

Wayne Stetski (NDP) – Yes.

Don Johnston (Lib) – Yes.

Bill Green (G) – Not exactly. I would first have a very considered consultation with all the voters who have supported me. The Green Party must have a voice.

All three speakers said they support proportional representation and would work to implement it for the next election.

Q – How would you advise us in being successful in electing a new government?

Don Johnston (Lib) – Get involved. Encourage everyone to vote. This is the most important election in our lifetime.

Bill Green (G) – Educate your self. Look at all the issues that we face. Ask: what is the change I want? Then vote with conviction for that change.

Wayne Stetski (NDP) – Young voters need to be inspired. The conservative and liberal governments have run Canada for 148 years. The NDP will bring fresh ideas and real change. Vote for Canadaʼs first Social Democratic government. History is knocking on the door. Will you answer?

~ Summary courtesy of Edgewater resident Anne Jardine.

---

Article Share

---