Author: intellectforsale

Domestic Policy Issue: Aboriginal Funding

Domestic Policy Issue: Aboriginal Funding

Good evening,

The next issue I wish to discuss is one that many humans in Canada are aware of and one that is a result of the way Canada’s history has transpired over the last roughly 500 years. The issue is that of Canadian Aboriginal funding and if the Canadian government should continue to allocate funds to those humans who identify as such.

First of all we need a bit of background. Of course, before Europeans first major contact with the North American continent around the end of the 1400’s, the Aboriginals were the primary residents of what is now known as Canada. Most Canadians went through Canadian history in school, and therefore most are already aware of many details such as the brutal taking of land, spreading of disease and widespread genocide of the Aboriginal people over the next couple hundred years. There was also the major issue in the 1900’s of the government funded residential school system where many children were taken from their families and brutalized in these Christian church administered buildings whose clear goal was to integrate them into a more “white and proper” society and destroy their culture over time.

Statistics Canada says that as of 2011, almost 1.5 million humans in Canada identified as an Aboriginal, which was about 4% of the total population of Canada at the time. The Canadian government has attempted to correct the wrongs of history by supplying funding for those who identify as Aboriginals. I believe that those humans who identify as Aboriginal Canadians should not be given checks in the mail every month to do with as they see fit. They should be given assistance in many different forms by the Canadian government so that they can make a proper living for themselves.

The kinds of assistance that should be supplied could be in the form of lower tuition rates at post secondary schools such as universities and trade schools. Education is very important to everyone and it can help make aware more opportunities out in the world that could be of help to those who will work for them. Social programs and support groups such as those for depression, suicide, drug addictions, alcoholism would be extremely important to improve the quality of life for Aboriginals people. When compared to the rest of the Canadian population, suicide, drug addiction and incarceration rates are very lopsided and needs to be addressed. This can be avoided if the government spent more time and effort into real help and not just throwing a check at them every month.

Other forms of assistance could be in the form of being placed in a lower tax bracket, assistance in acquiring jobs, more funding for those who attend school and monetary assistance for those enrolled in programs and who show progress in their attempt to curb their drug addiction, alcoholism, etc.

Of course, I cannot hope to cover all the issues that could arise and those that are already out there. In the long run, the Canadian government should be able to eventually stop funding to this specific group of humans; this cannot go on forever and money could be better spent on programs helping Canadians as a whole have better opportunities in life. Ideally, a few generations should be all that it takes. Aboriginal culture is an important part of Canada’s heritage and should be preserved as well as possible. The languages, history and spirituality making up Aboriginal culture should not be simply phased out but integrated into the Canadian consciousness for the possibility of being enjoyed by all.

It would be fantastic to get to a place where it is not Aboriginals versus the rest of Canadians but to a place where all humans of Canada can coexist peacefully, move away from the harsh past, and move forward into a brighter and inclusive future.

-IntellectForSale

Domestic Policy Issue: The Senate of Canada

Domestic Policy Issue: The Senate of Canada

Good evening,

The issue that will be discussed today will be on the topic of the Senate of Canada. The question that will be explored is this: should the federal government elect or abolish the Senate?

While I do not have the time to fully discuss the Senate, what it does and how it works, I can at least give a bit of background required for a sufficient understanding of the matter. The Senate of Canada is part of the Parliament of Canada known as the Upper House, whereas the House of the commons is the Lower House. There are a total of 105 seats that senators from different regions in Canada can occupy; these regions are based on some arbitrary division and each province and territory have a specific number of senators. Also, the approval of both the House of Commons and the Senate is needed for legislation to be passed.

First, we need to look at how the Senate is divided based on province/ territory and region. There would definitely need to be some slight tweaking in this case but for the most part it seems to be fine. Each MP in the House of Commons is elected and represents roughly an even number of people per region in each province or territory. Therefore, the need to have this representation in the Senate is not necessarily required.

Next, the biggest concern is exactly who the Senators occupying these seats are and whether they are properly qualified to be a “sober second thought”. I believe that each Senator should be elected but no Senator can have a political affiliation to any party in Canada. They should be elected by the citizens in each region based upon their credentials and their own personal (unbiased) opinions; many, if not most, of the opinions of any one Senator would preferably not fit nicely into any one party’s own ideas. They should be required to state and elaborate on their position on a number of topics. Each Senator should also be required to have property or some sort of investment in that same region, forcing them to experience any social or economic hardships that their own voters experience as well.

Potential Senators would, of course, have to be investigated for any criminal activity or problematic history prior to choosing to run. At the present time, Senators may serve in the Senate until they reach the age of 75. I believe that for the Senate to keep up with the modern world, a Senator should hold a seat until they are 75 or after a full 30 years has passed, whichever comes first. This allows the Senate to avoid stagnation and properly allows Canada to pass legislation that would keep it at the front of the pack on the world stage with regard to social, economic and domestic issues.

One major problem, in my opinion, is that of vacancies in the Senate. A seat in the Senate should not be vacant for any more then 365 days after the previous Senator has been vacated. This allows each province to be fully represented and a proper discussion from the input of all 105 voices to keep the Senate fully functional.

Finally, corruption and partisanship should not be an issue in this type of elected Senate; neither should exist. There needs to be a strict watchdog over the Senate to investigate any and all issues concerning any Senator. They should have the power to remove Senators from their seats after a thorough investigation and this watchdog committee should be almost completely separate from the government allowing only the Governor General to have a presence. Senators need to be transparent and accountable so they maintain the respect and confidence of those who voted for them.

-IntellectForSale

Environmental Issue: Genetically Modified Organisms

Environmental Issue: Genetically Modified Organisms

Good evening,

The next issue I would like to discuss is one that many humans around the world automatically assume is a bad idea and they have images spawn in their heads about evil scientists in secret underground laboratories. The question we will look into is that should we use and ingest genetically modified foods.

Because of the effects of climate change, whether or not you believe it is caused by humans or if it is a natural occurrence is irrelevant here (and will be discussed at a later date), which is clearly happening to some extent, it is having a global effect on the agricultural industry. This is causing a shortage of food and in some areas certain crops become harder to grow because of a shortened growing season and therefore become more expensive to buy once it reaches your local supermarket.

Genetically modified organisms (GMO’s) are just the result of pulling the DNA from one organism and putting it into another one, changing its genotype. Specific genes are extracted based on the desired trait that humans want expressed in the new organism; humans want to facilitate a change in that organisms phenotype. In plants, this process allows the GMO to be more resistant to pests, diseases and different products of their environments; these are only a few examples. Soybeans, maize and canola are examples of common GMO’s found right here across Canada.

Research of genetically modified organisms shows that the upsides far outweigh the downsides. It shows that GMO’s are typically just as safe as “natural” or “organic” foods; while GMO is a name that gets a bad rap, the names natural and organic pinned to different foods seems to be mostly a marketing ploy designed to raise prices in supermarkets. There are typically no adverse side effects to consuming a GMO as compared to a natural food, and most humans would never realize a difference if given both at once.

Ignorance of the subject of genetically modified foods has lead to an unwarranted negative perception by the public who do not have all the information required to form an educated opinion. I believe that the government and the agricultural industry in general should do more to educate the public about what exactly a GMO is and why it is nothing for them to fear. There are no deadly chemicals injected into these crops and there isn’t a snake gene injected into a corn plant giving some poisonous mutant hybrid (as cool as that may be in the realm of science fiction).

In short, in the near future more and more crops will be genetically modified to produce higher crop yields due to acquired resistance to pests and various diseases. This will allow humans to produce more food in general, and at a lower cost, avoiding mass global food shortages, especially since the world population is increasing at a rapid rate. For genetically modified organisms, I believe that educating the general public is key.

-IntellectForSale

Foreign Policy Issue: United Nations

Foreign Policy Issue: United Nations

Good evening,

The next issue that will be discussed is one of foreign policy. Likely most Canadians, along with most people around the world, know in some form what the United Nations is. Most have some ideas and opinions about it and what it does; therefore, the question is should Canada maintain a presence within the United Nations and if so, how much?

The United Nations was created in 1945 and is an international organization that promotes cooperation between almost all countries of the world and was a replacement organization for the League of Nations. The U.N. was originally designed to prevent another conflict on the scale of World War II, but has gone on to invest time and resources into objectives such as humanitarian aid, social and economic development, as well as protecting human rights and the environment.

Canada has historically been known as a peacekeeping nation, giving millions of dollars to the U.N. per year to help those hit by natural disasters, famine, and other such events around the world. As a founding member of the United Nations, I believe it is important to most Canadians that, because of our wealth and our relative social and economic stability, we continue to help those who are not as fortunate as we are to be born in a country such as this. It is not the fault of a human to be born into a broken family or impoverished country; therefore we must do what we can to improve their standard of living and give them a better quality of life.

For the most part, I believe Canada should do what it can for international ventures with the U.N. without sacrificing its resources that could be used on a national level. Each country should first be sure that its own people are taken care of and then proceed to help others; a nation that is not stable in its own right cannot hope to help another become stable itself effectively. The United Nations itself should be run by those humans with a high level of integrity, free of corruption and without a self-serving agenda; the U.N. in general should only be in place for such a time as it remains effective.

-IntellectForSale