My response to A Conversation with Michael Ignatieff

29 January 2009. Launch Magazine.

I am completely non-partisan when it comes to municipal, national or federal elections. Elections at my university, however, are a completely different story, especially when it comes to the student union president position.

Every time there is an election, I go through each of the platforms and decide which one is the most plausible and aligned with my beliefs. I think there have even been a few times I’ve abstained if I didn’t feel like candidates have represented me adequately.

Recently, Liberal Party leader Michael Ignatieff embarked on a campaign to get the opinions of Canadian youth. A Conversation with Michael Ignatieff reached many universities, including Dalhousie, McMaster, Calgary, Manitoba and UBC. At most locations, the event was over capacity and students had to be turned away.

The campaign was a kick-off to the Canada at 150: Rising to the Challenge conference that will be held in March 2010. The conference is supposed to be non-partisan, yet is hosted by the Liberal Party, so take from that what you will.

I was in class, so I couldn’t attend the event at McMaster, and was also unfortunately unable to attend the online chat because I was doing some work for McMaster’s upcoming presidential elections. However, upon the reading the transcript of the online chat, I thought there were two very important questions which were asked.

[Comment From Mike Brown]
Mr Ignatieff, I would like to thank you for your cross country tour of universities. I had the opportunity to see you speak here in Calgary. My question is as follows: I recognize that post-secondary education is a provincial issue but just like health care it can be influenced by the federal government. Here in Alberta we are facing large increases in tuition each year without a comparable increase in quality of education. In fact, the quality has tended to decrease. Should the Liberal party form the government, how do you hope to help students cope with increasing tuition and, as a result, increasing student debt?

Michael Ignatieff: You get the grades, you get to go. That needs to be our motto for higher education in Canada. In practice this will mean higher levels of student aid, more grants than loans, and where loans are applied, longer repayment terms and lower interest rates where possible. We also need to incentivize hiring of young graduates from colleges and universities. The current level of youth unemployment–double the national average–is just too high.

I disagree with what Ignatieff says here based on what I have experienced: as someone who was illegible for OSAP, I couldn’t get bursaries or scholarships, even if my grades were high enough. Despite being a first-generation post-secondary student, I wasn’t eligible for that bursary once again because my parents’ income prevented me from getting OSAP.

However, I agree with what he says on hiring young grads: there are tons of us out there who want work, but are finding that companies are not always interested in new hires. Of course, this is also where TalentEgg comes in, but enough shameless self promotions.

Do you agree with Ignatieff’s statement here? Why or why not?

[Comment From Joe Turcotte]
Mr. Ignatieff, your recent university tour and this online town hall seem to indicate that you’re hoping to reach out to a new, and often overlooked, segment of the Canadian population– the youth. Could you please explain what role you see for Canada’s youth in politics today and describe any changes that the political system itself should take to engage/incorporate us?

Michael Ignatieff: I got involved first time when I was about 17 and once bitten at an early age, you stay bitten. Parties need to reach out and engage young people and give them responsibility early on. I was a national youth organizer for Trudeau at age 21, and that was a challenge. Bottom line: I trust young people because when I was young someone was crazy enough to trust me.

I completely agree with Ignatieff here. I think there is so much voter apathy amongst youth because there is no candidate to adequately represent us and, furthermore, we often see the issues the candidates present as irrelevant to our age group.

So, why are we so apathetic?

After all, we are the ones who will lead our country in the not-too-distant future. Is the problem that we don’t want to get involved in politics, or is it that we don’t know how to get involved?

What can we do to solicit change? How do we want Canada to function in the future?

Preliminary 2008 Federal Election Results

"Preliminary 2008 Federal Election Results", October 2008

According to www.cbc.ca the results for the Ancaster-Dundas-Flamborough-Westdale are as follows (as of 11:16pm):

17 542 Conservative = 46.66%
10 118 Liberal = 27.2%
6 125 NDP = 16.5%
3 586 Green = 9.36
106 Marxist-Leninist = 0.28%

The riding around McMaster is incumbent Conservative. Interestingly, the other ridings in Hamilton all elected NDP to office.

Nationally:
144 Conservative Seats = 37.14% of the vote share
76 Liberal Seats = 27.7% of the vote share
50 Bloc Quebecois Seats = 8.8% of the vote share
34 NDP Seats = 18.55% of the vote share
3 Independant Seats = 0.78% of the vote share
0 Green Seats = 6.55% of the vote share
0 Other seats = 0.49% of the vote share

Nationally this corresponds to a Conservative minority government. There are also reports that the voter turn-out for this election is one of the lowest on record. More information to come!

What are your thoughts on both? Did you vote? Why or why not?

North America = One Nation?

"North America = One Nation?", January 2008. (Co-written with Chad Fullerton)

In a switch from the regular articles, we decided to touch on a political issue. Did you know there is a movement trying to combine all of the North American nations (Canada, the US and Mexico) into one unified country? The move would merge existing governments, loosen borders between the countries, and generate a new currency, which would be accepted anywhere (and everywhere) in North America. Its proposed name is the 'AmeroDollar'. Comparisons have been made between the European Union and their Eurodollar, and this planned junction.

The topic of an NAU (North American Union), as heated and highly debated a topic as it is, brings up some interesting questions that we as university students can try to answer. What are the benefits/negatives of this happening? Do you think it is a good/bad idea? Do you think such a movement by political leaders exists today? Through information we provide, we at MacInsiders are allowing you to make your own informed decision.

There is a lot of information out there on the topic, but you need to know the issue exists first so you know what to look for. Many groups have been attempting to bring attention to the issue. For example, take a look at this short video, Doublespeak 101 (4 min). People protesting the NAU don't like the idea of us losing our national identity, and being run by a single, smaller government (more power to a concentrated number of people).

Don’t you love how our government keeps us so uninformed (note my sarcasm...)? This seems like the kind of information sitting around in the local planning office, apparently available for display but in actuality no one is aware of its existence. Of course, if you knew that they were accessible you would have gone to see them by now, and don’t really appreciate the imminent destruction of your home that may be occurring shortly.

Two of the first few words that come up when one searches for the North American Union using Google is conspiracy theory. That automatically makes one sceptical. It makes one think of fanatics and crazy people. Also Mel Gibson...and again, crazy people. But there is a lot of information available – but only for those who know it exists in the first place. See my above pop culture reference from the previous paragraph.

Stop the North American Union provides information from many vantage points. Some seem a little bit out there (especially the one which argues against Mexican immigration into the United States, as it is destroying American values...funny, I (Danielle) thought America was built on immigration and destroying pre-existing culture and values?), but at again, it gives you a very broad perspective, which is good. Vive La Canada on the other hand, provides more solid information, as well as from a Canadian vantage point. But the best resource we have found thus far is an anti-NAU Facebook Group, which is loaded with websites, videos and other information.

The important thing you need to know about the issue are that this is a legitimate one, and we have a choice as to whether we as a nation accept it or not. A petition is available here and it gives a very brief overview of why, as Canadians, we should not accept the motion.

Please educate yourselves about the matter! This is a very, very important issue to all Canadian citizens, and it will impact future generations as well!