John Laforet2013-05-20T21:40:18-04:00John Laforethttp://www.huffingtonpost.ca/author/index.php?author=john-laforetCopyright 2008, HuffingtonPost.com, Inc.HuffingtonPost Blogger Feed for John LaforetGood old fashioned elbow grease.Five Tips For Landing the Job You Wanttag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2013:/theblog//3.29927932013-04-02T08:27:23-04:002013-04-02T08:30:02-04:00John Laforethttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-laforet/
As of January 2013, Canada's youth unemployment rate is 13.5 per cent and that means greater competition for what jobs are available for young professionals.
From an employer's perspective, narrowing down a massive pool of resumes to a few candidates is equally challenging, as a higher overall unemployment rate has resulted in applicants who would normally be considered 'over-qualified' applying for more entry level positions and demonstrating a good mix of experience and passion for the work.
Below are some tips I offer soon-to-be and recent grads as they enter the workforce. They highlight the best practices of those who have hit me up for employment at my firm.
Find the employer you want and reach out.
I get a lot of emails from people interested in working in public relations. Normally they ask to meet with me to discuss my business and career path. Typically these meetings are sold as information interviews, explaining that they hope to better understand their own interests following our meeting. In reality, these meetings almost always turn into reverse job interviews and have resulted more than once in a job offer in the short term for a position that had not yet been posted, and ultimately is not posted, because these folks fill it first.
Demonstrate an interest in the prospective employer's field of work and what distinguishes the business you're applying to from its competition.
The fact that an employer has agreed to meet with you to discuss a position tells you that you are qualified, at least on paper. It's now often down to a matter of 'fit' for the position and your suitability as a member of the team. Successful job applicants can articulate their interest in both the field of work and in what makes the employer different from others. From a personal perspective, I'm always looking for people who can meet our needs today and grow with the business as our needs change in the future. I look for people who understand what we do and how it is different than others in our field, and can demonstrate why they would be a good, long-term member of our team.
Share more than what is in your resume.
Show a prospective employer what you understand by talking about relevant experiences and education in a manner that demonstrates your abilities. Make the bullet points on your resume come alive with background, context, and analysis. The best job candidates can talk about their experiences in ways that show a high degree of knowledge that goes beyond being able to function in a position, which is what resume bullets suggest.
Ask good questions.
There's nothing wrong with having questions about the terms and conditions of the position, but don't turn the end of the discussion into one of money or benefits. These questions are important and need to be answered before you accept an offer of employment, but are premature because they will not positively affect evaluating you as a candidate. Ask questions about the work itself, the types of clients who benefit, or opportunities for growth within the organization, as these are all areas that signal an interest in the position itself.
Remember why they are there.
You need a job and that's why you're sitting across the desk -- but why are they? They have a position to fill and that position comes with a budgeted amount of resources. It's your job to convince them that that money is best spent with you fulfilling the responsibilities of the position.
Prospective employees who come on heavy with the "I need a job" message miss the opportunity to demonstrate an ability to fulfil the employer's needs in exchange for that job, and at least when I'm the decision maker, lose the opportunity to.
Some Final Thoughts:
Obviously these aren't foolproof tips to success. Millennials face an extremely competitive job market where employers are increasingly cautious about their decisions and the competition is fierce. That said, anyone who is optimistic enough to be hiring in this economy, believes his or her business is growing and is prepared to weather the current economic storm. They are looking to the future and looking for people who will join them on their journey of success. Show them you're up for it.
]]>The Case For Paid Internstag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2013:/theblog//3.28127632013-03-07T07:18:26-05:002013-05-07T05:12:01-04:00John Laforethttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-laforet/Unpaid internships are in the news again as a result of a groundbreaking study on precarious employment in Ontario. Findings show approximately 50 per cent of GTA and Hamilton workers have unstable or precarious employment. This does not bode well for younger Ontarians, whose generation faces a far higher unemployment rate than the province-wide average.
There are a number of factors that play into the decision to pay an intern (or not), of course. That said, greed is ultimately the common denominator that business leaders share when determining whether to create paid or unpaid internships. Some value money over talent, and for others, the opposite is true.
When my firm brings on an intern, as we do from time to time, it is important to me that we give that individual the opportunity to demonstrate existing skills, while being exposed to new ideas and opportunities to learn and grow. A good internship should benefit both the intern and the employer.
Often what becomes clear is that there remains a significant gap between what is taught in school and what is expected in the workplace, from both a quality and professionalism standpoint. Suddenly 70, 80 or even 90 per cent accuracy does not cut it. Handing assignments in late or with typos is no longer acceptable and what is considered 'good writing' has changed too. This is why internships are a crucial part of transitioning from school to professional employment, as it is expected during an internship that core skills will be developed that are particularly relevant to the workplace.
Interns at my firm are always paid and have the opportunity to gain industry-specific knowledge, while being able to work on real-world projects. As a business owner, the decision has always been fairly simple and based in part on what is in it for me as a provider of internships, which is the opportunity to attract and grow talent internally.
Unpaid interns might save an employer a couple thousand dollars a month, but the Ministry of Labour guidelines make the internship relatively pointless for anyone who is looking to hire new talent and grow people within their organization.
The only thing that makes an unpaid internship legal is that the intern is not considered an employee and is therefore not covered by the protections of the Employment Standards Act, which includes a requirement that employees are paid the minimum wage.
According to the Ontario Ministry of Labour, there are six criteria that must be met to allow for an unpaid intern to be exempt from the Employment Standards Act and therefore not protected with basic employment rights such as the Minimum wage.
One of the six criteria that allow an unpaid intern to not be classified as an employee is that "the individual [intern] is not accorded a right to become an employee of the person providing the training." This means you can't train an intern and then hire them, without the intern having been considered an employee and therefore entitled to at least minimum wage during the internship itself. Another is that "The person providing the training [the employer] derives little, if any, benefit from the activity of the individual while he or she is being trained [the intern]." In other words if you don't pay an intern there is virtually nothing gained, at least legally, for the business.
What incentive is there to train individuals without benefit during the training or following the training?
In my view, it makes little sense to train someone to work in your industry on an unpaid basis, knowing your business cannot benefit from the time and expense involved in providing that training.
The simple answer is to pay your interns.
It makes sense for employers with a long view towards growth and success to pay their interns. Paid interns can bring their skills and ideas to the table, gain practical experience, grow within an organization and take on additional roles and responsibilities throughout their career.
As someone in business you can either try to hoard money or talent. Hoarding money will cost you talent, just as hoarding talent will cost you money. But the decision to seek out and develop talent internally will pay far greater dividends than the exploitive savings that come from not paying entry level members of your team.
]]>Kathleen Wynne For the Ontario Liberal Leadership Win?tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2013:/theblog//3.24497462013-01-10T14:02:14-05:002013-03-12T05:12:02-04:00John Laforethttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-laforet/
Delegated conventions have their own key requirements for a candidate to be successful.
Efficient Support: For enough delegates to be elected, support must be geographically balanced among as many ridings as possible to win 50+1 at the convention.
Strong Organization: The campaign team must be able to organize and manage on the ground delegate recruitment and election efforts in as many ridings as possible.
Money: The campaign needs to have the financial resources to fuel it's outreach efforts, voter identification, get out the vote, and to assist delegates in getting to the convention.
Room to Grow: A candidate has to gain as much first ballot support as possible to stay in contention, while not alienating potential second, third and maybe forth ballot supporters.
Wynne has 1,533 members of the party running for delegate spots in her name, spread out over all 107 ridings in Ontario. Pupatello has 1,281 candidates for delegate spots in 106 ridings.
Glen Murray chose to drop out of the race and endorse Wynne prior to delegate election meetings where delegates, who will ultimately elect the next leader, will be elected themselves. Assuming his supporters follow him, Wynne's advantage going into this weekend's delegate election meetings is significant.
This isn't going to be a one ballot convention. With six candidates remaining it is likely the convention will go to four, maybe five ballots before being resolved. Without knowing how many delegates each candidate will get elected, or how many of those will actually attend the convention, it is hard to predict exactly what will happen.
When you compare candidates on policy, substance and style it is reasonable to assume supporters of Gerard Kennedy and Eric Hoskins may find themselves most at home in an Ontario Liberal Party led by Kathleen Wynne.
Winning the leadership of the Ontario Liberal Party at this point in their history has got to be bittersweet at best. The next occupant of that office will automatically become Premier of Ontario for a time, but faces a growing list of disappointed stakeholders, including former party allies like Ontario's teachers, an emboldened opposition and a stubborn fiscal situation.
As outgoing Premier McGuinty said when he resigned, it is time for the Ontario Liberal Party to renew itself. If the next leader of the Ontario Liberal Party is to have any hope of winning the office of Premier in their own right, they will have to act quickly to right as many of the previous government's wrongs as possible, immediately.
Whoever wins the leadership is going to have to get down to work right away.
]]>Forget Magnotta: Three Canadian Newsmakers Worth Rememberingtag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//3.23574702012-12-24T12:51:03-05:002013-02-23T05:12:01-05:00John Laforethttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-laforet/Canada's Newsmaker of the Year paints a bleak picture about how the Canadian Press saw our country in 2012.
The sensationalizing of the details of grisly crimes, whether mass shootings in the U.S. or bizarre cases like Magnotta's, only serves to immortalize those accused of committing such heinous acts, and denies their victims the dignity they deserve. It also takes precious media resources away from covering other news, burying a lot of compelling stories along the way.
This idea that the public needs to or wants to know the blow by blow of how a heinous crime was committed, by whom and why, blurs the line between news and infotainment.
Ultimately the decision of what news becomes readily available to Canadians is in the hands of editors and journalists across our country, and the backlash that the Canadian Press is receiving for their selection of Magnotta is important, because it shows Canadians are standing up and saying we want better than that.
As a country, we become a better place when our news reflects some of the more weighty or meaningful contributions individual Canadians are making to create a better country for all of us.
There are a number of other worthy Canadian newsmakers who better deserve the title over Magnotta. Below I summarize three Canadians whose contributions to Canadian life are worthy of notice as we reflect on 2012.
Mark Carney has received a lot of positive media attention as head of the Bank of Canada, in addition to his status as a sought after potential candidate to salvage the Liberal Party of Canada. He is also the newly selected Governor of the Bank of England.
Carney is credited with steering Canada's economy through the stubborn global recession that we find ourselves in. He would have raised the quality of the economic debate in the House of Commons and provided Canadians with an experienced alternative to the current government in 2015 had he decided to run for the Liberals. Instead, he becomes the first 'foreigner' to lead the Bank of England, which in itself is no small feat, and something all Canadians should be proud of.
Although Ashley Smith died tragically in 2007, her name continues to repeatedly be in the news as coverage of the inquest into her death exposes more troubling information about how Canada's justice system fails to address the mental health issues of inmates in a dignified manner. Smith's death and the ongoing inquest that has followed, present the opportunity for Canadians to create a better, fairer justice system for all Canadians.
She may not be a newsmaker herself, but her story certainly is, and it is difficult one that Canadians need to hear if we are to improve our justice system for everyone.
The person I would personally select as Newsmaker of the Year would be double lung transplant recipient Hélène Campbell who at 20 was able to put a face on a very worthy, but difficult to discuss cause. Hélène's social media efforts chronicled her own journey and encouraged Ontarians to register their consent to donate their organs in the event of their own death.
By humanizing this very important cause, with the assistance from star power like Justin Bieber, Don Cherry and Ellen DeGeneres, Campbell has had a hand in increasing organ donation consent registrations significantly. Undoubtedly, more Canadians will survive serious illnesses because Campbell gave a voice to a critical cause, while waiting for a transplant that would allow hers to continue.
No one can control what events will shape our world in any given year, but collectively we can choose what stories we allow to shape our memory of that year. Magnotta is the wrong way to remember 2012, especially when there are so many alternative choices that will allow Canadians to reflect positively on the past as we seek to shape the present and the future.
]]>With "Pay Before Pump" Law, This Man Would Be Alivetag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//3.18998732012-09-20T09:34:02-04:002012-11-20T05:12:01-05:00John Laforethttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-laforet/$112 bucks of gasoline. The dragging death of gas station attendant Jayesh Prajapati after he was run over by a driver fleeing the station without paying is another tragic reminder of how senseless and avoidable some crimes are. Liberal MPP Mike Colle rightly sensed there is an opportunity to update Ontario's laws to require motorists to pre-pay for gas they pump. This is a good idea and an excellent opportunity for a private member's bill to influence government policy.
We live in a province where most people are fortunate enough to go to work with the understanding that there are health and safety regulations designed to ensure their job is safe, so that they can return to their family at the end of the day. It's clear that for individuals who work in this particular industry, there are options to improve health and safety legislation, by changing how the purchase of gasoline is transacted, and it makes perfect sense that legislation, like the bill MPP Colle is currently working on, would be passed.
We may only hear about the fatal incidents of gas theft, but according to the Toronto Star, between July 2009 and 2010 there were 1,618 reports of gas thefts in Toronto. That is more than 30 opportunities a week similar incidents could occur.
This isn't the first time the idea of legislation requiring drivers to pay before they pump has been considered by the Ontario government. Shortly after Atifeh Rad died of injuries he received during a similar incident in Mississauga in May 2011, the government was reported to be considering legislation.
The last time the government contemplated pre-pay legislation, Ted Stoner from the Canadian Petroleum Products Institute was quoted saying "Let us evaluate what's required, ensure the safety of the customers and employees and ensure security of the site. We'll put in place the necessary measures."
That evaluation came too late to ensure the safety of Jayesh Prajapati. Let's hope the Ontario Legislature acts before another gas theft fatality occurs.
It is hard to understand why gasoline industry would oppose pre-pay legislation that would protect their employees and ensure they are paid for their product, especially when you consider how thin the profit margin is for the gas retailer themselves.
Jamie Fox, who owns a gas station in PEI, where the PEI Gasoline Retailers Association is debating creating its own pay-before-you-pump policy, pointed out that that the gas station owner only makes 4.5 cents per litre of gas sold, which means $100 dollars worth of fuel that is stolen requires another 2,200 litres of gas to be sold to make up for the loss.
British Columbia passed pre-pay legislation in 2008, the first in Canada. A number of states in the US have similar legislation. In a society where so many people use debit and credit cards to pay for daily transactions, it seems reasonable to ask law abiding citizens to pay for their gas in a manner that will help stop a frequent crime, and one that has proven deadly far too frequently.
MPP Colle's proposal for legislation to protect workers at gas stations is timely and something that the legislature should work to pass during this session to bring an end to this senseless, petty crime that occasionally has fatal consequences.]]>Don't Let the Hotheads Prevail In Quebectag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//3.18509482012-09-02T19:01:27-04:002012-11-02T05:12:01-04:00John Laforethttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-laforet/la belle province post-Charest, poses a threat to Canada as we know it. With public opinion polls showing that Parti Québécois Leader Pauline Marois poised to form government in Tuesday's Election, the threat is very real.
There is little doubt Quebec would benefit from a change in government, but what is concerning about elections in Quebec is that unlike any other province in Confederation, the fate of our country as we know it is always at risk.
There has been a concerted effort to convince Quebeckers that their place is within Canada and it is disheartening to see PQ leader Pauline Marois speak openly of her plans to create conditions for winning a referendum that it is clear a majority of Quebeckers don't want.
What the PQ fails to understand is that the continual sparring with the federal government and defiant support of secession, regardless of a demonstrated lack of public support for separation, creates an unstable environment for investors, who are in a position to strengthen the quality of life for all residents of Quebec.
Having been around politics for some time, it amazes me that someone can seek public office, and potentially win, on a platform centered on kicking the sleeping dog and in doing so, creating a crisis the majority would prefer to avoid.
Quebec has negotiated a unique place for itself within Canada and have gained broad recognition of the notion of Quebeckers constituting a distinct society and 'nation' within a united Canada. While it would be hard to imagine these and other recognitions as satisfying the deep seeded desire for some in Quebec to be a sovereign state, it is beneath anyone seeking to lead any government to purposely create strife as a means to a political end.
Tuesday night, Quebeckers will chose their candidates for the National Assembly and in doing so, will choose our fate as a united country. Here is to hoping cooler heads prevail and a government dedicated to maintaining the calm we've enjoyed over the last number of years, is elected.]]>Don't Bring a Gun to a Wind Energy Debatetag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//3.17263312012-08-01T12:30:28-04:002012-10-01T05:12:03-04:00John Laforethttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-laforet/a death threat while conducting field work on a project site in West Grey.
According to the CBC, Damen had "a shotgun pulled on him while working on a wind turbine site northeast of London, Ont." Police are also investigating threatening phone calls made against Damen.
While I am not known for expressing opinions remotely sympathetic to that of the wind industry or its employees, and certainly oppose the development of the project in question, I believe there is an important point that needs to be stated and ideally shared by all Ontarians.
Guns and threats of violence have no place in any debate in our province. I suspect for most freedom-loving Ontarians this is something we all believe, and certainly during my time as President of Wind Concerns Ontario it was a concept I don't believe was ever questioned or debated.
It is important for everyone in Ontario to be able to participate in a civil discourse with the confidence that their participation on either side will not present a threat of physical harm to them.
Everyone is entitled to their opinion and that fervent belief in core democratic principles has always been at the heart of wind energy opponents core arguments against the process put in place by the Green Energy Act.
Passage of council motions endorsing local planning and decision making, election-based organizing designed to defeat uncooperative politicians, mass petition drives, write-in campaigns and reliance on earned media and grassroots lobbying strategies all require a strong, free democratic state to be successful.
It is my hope that the police in West Grey take their investigation of Damen's claims very seriously and that anyone out there who believes their gun can serve a political or policy purpose, will reflect on the truly destructive and democratically corrosive nature of their ways.
I want to live in an Ontario where people can have a say in the kinds of projects their community will host, where we know with certainty what risks come with those installations and local planners in local municipalities can work with council and the community to make decisions that are best for residents. That vision is shared by tens of thousands of Ontarians and the vast majority of wind energy opponents. We cannot allow the prospect of individuals using threats of violence to deprive us all of that.
This is not a time for opponents of wind energy to try to justify the actions of one individual or to point out that opponents too have been on the receiving end of threats or violent acts themselves. This is a moment for every reasonable Ontarian to agree certain actions are never okay, under any circumstances.
Guns and threats of violence cannot play any part in any decision that is going to have any legitimacy.]]>Let's try that Ontario Election Again, Shall We?tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//3.14301092012-04-17T16:45:05-04:002012-06-17T05:12:01-04:00John Laforethttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-laforet/
The NDP made impressive gains, but Andrea Horwath is really only now beginning to demonstrate strong leadership and an ability to make what appear to be principled decisions.
During the last campaign, each party leader promised Ontario's best days lay ahead, while only the PCs offered any cuts as part of a plan to address the deficit and get Ontario's economic house back in order. The NDP didn't run on tax increases, but now seem prepared to publicly take a position that is in keeping with their party's worldview. Good on Horwath for doing that.
Each is a valid option to reining in a deficit. Dalton McGuinty certainly didn't run on savaging collective bargaining rights, fighting with teachers, doctors and anyone else who earns their living in the public service. Nor did the Premier run on building casinos in Liberal bastions like downtown Toronto or downtown Ottawa. Each of these is a big departure from the limited, tentative mandate Ontarians offered the Premier and are worthy of public debate and ultimately allowing Ontarians to decide what is best.
The Liberal's position that Ontario doesn't need an election right now, arguing the province just had one, doesn't consider what we know now that we didn't know then.
Now that the public has access to all of these things, and both the Liberals and NDP have joined the PCs in offering distinct variations of how they would handle Ontario's finances for the coming year and into the future -- we've got a real reason to go to the polls. Hudak's PCs have been largely absent from the public budget debate, in large part due to their early decision to vote against the budget, but in doing so, are responsible for putting the NDP in a place where they had to develop some tangible economic positions of their own and Ontario is better for it.
Let's have an election this spring and let Ontarians decide not simply who they trust to govern, but also whose plan for Ontario's finances they believe will serve our future best.
Fixed elections seem like a good idea, until they become tools to allow a governing party to avoid disclosing their true plans until it's too late for voters to say or do anything about it. This isn't the first time McGuinty has run on spending and turned to cuts within months of claiming power -- but this is the first time the NDP and PCs are in a position to do something about it.
For the sake of our province, let's hope the opposition gives all Ontarians an opportunity to vote on how best to handle Ontario's economic recovery, now that all the facts are available.
Regardless of whose plan you think is best, is there any reason to deny Ontarians, in whose name the government spends and in whose great-grandchildren's names this Premier assigns debt, the opportunity to chart the course they want our government to take?]]>Liberals Experience the Soft Tyranny of High Expectationstag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//3.13661592012-03-20T01:46:44-04:002012-05-19T05:12:01-04:00John Laforethttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-laforet/
It began when then-party president Alf Apps gave an interview just days after Jack Layton's death. Apps tried to make a distinction between the strength of the man and the strength of brand, arguing that Toronto-Danforth was a Liberal seat ready to come home.
Former Deputy Premier George Smitherman continued to downplay the NDP's chances, while following Apps' lead boosting the Liberals' chances with grandiose statements about the party's plans. The Liberals let it be known that former MP Belinda Stronach was a possible candidate, as was Gerard Kennedy. Smitherman ruled himself out, as did former Mayor David Miller. Yet Smitherman assured that whomever the Liberals picked after an exciting open nomination campaign would 'look like stars' compared to the NDP's Craig Scott.
Smitherman went so far as to tell the National Post in an interview:
"The Liberal Party sees a very, very good opportunity in Toronto-Danforth, and the effort there will be to have a vigorously contested nomination. I think a lot of people have been surprised at the stature gap that the NDP has created by nominating such a low-key and frankly uninspiring candidate."
In the end, Grant Gordon, a talented, but relatively unknown ad exec won the Liberal nomination against a former Green Party candidate who doesn't even live in the City of Toronto. The promise of "a big name to take back the riding it held for 16 years before Layton" did not come to fruition.
The man former Toronto-Danforth Liberal candidate Andrew Lang dubbed a 'dud,' and Smitherman tried to paint as "lacklustre," "low key," "uninspiring," and a "no-name candidate" now must also be called "winner" in light of MP-elect Craig Scott's massive 59% of the vote.
By framing the race as the Liberals' to lose, guys like Apps, Smitherman, and others gave Craig Scott a bizarre underdog status (bizarre because he was clearly ahead the entire time). The strategy may have worked for generating a heightened sense of attention on the riding, but clearly did not have an impact upon the results. It also has forced the Liberal Party into a situation of having to deal with the fall out of a deeply irresponsible communications strategy that failed to deliver results. If Apps and Smitherman were trying to help, this wasn't the way to do it.
Relying on history to help inform one's punditry prevents embarrassments like this one. Neither Apps nor Smitherman appear to have considered the reality that the NDP had a 68% chance of holding the seat based on historic results of by-elections throughout Canadian history.
For a party that is in the process of attempting to rebuild itself after the historic and humiliating defeat Michael Ignatieff led the Liberals to, it would seem that some humility is in order. The unprecedented attempt to convince the general public within Toronto-Danforth and across Canada that the Liberals were well-positioned to win when they weren't is a stunning strategy. People who live 4,500 kilometres from Toronto-Danforth read in the Vancouver Sun just last month that the Liberals were in a position to win; they'll now be reading about a "lacklustre, no name, uninspiring dud" candidate who blew the Liberals right out of the water. Imagine what that does for confidence in the Liberal brand.
An honest, compelling, and believable narrative about what an uphill battle the Liberal Party faces in Toronto-Danforth and elsewhere would have served the party in better stead than relying on a communications strategy that sees pundits creating inflated expectations the party simply can't achieve. ]]>Since When is it Acceptable to Destroy the Environment to Save the Environment?tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//3.12780682012-02-15T00:25:33-05:002012-04-15T05:12:01-04:00John Laforethttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-laforet/kill, harm and harass" threatened species, and to "disrupt and destroy" their habitat.
Since when is it acceptable to destroy the environment to save the environment? How strange it is that the laws created to protect wildlife, endangered species, migratory bird paths, rare biodiversity, and pristine shorelines are the very laws that are now deemed inconvenient for government environment ministers. These are the people who want to "streamline" (read repeal) environmental protections to make it easier to get projects like this approved.
For example, a magnificent 28 kilometres of undeveloped shoreline in eastern Lake Ontario lies in wait for the onslaught of the construction of massive wind turbines in an area that is virtually a migratory bird super highway. Ostrander Point in Prince Edward County is home to hundreds of species of birds, wildlife rare vegetation, and is a globally recognized Important Bird Area (IBA).
The government of Ontario may grant a permit for Gilead Power Corporation to kill, harm, and harass endangered species such as the Blanding's Turtle and the Whip-poor-will bird. The permit also includes destroying their habitat which is not very green, is it?
Environmental NGOs around the world have specifically identified IBAs as "no-go" zones for industrial wind turbines because of their Globally Threatened Species, Range Restricted Species, Biome Restricted Species. They are areas for the conservation of globally threatened, range restricted, and congregatory birds.
The second permit applied for by Gilead Power is for construction of 5.4 km of roads in a habitat that has been described by their own consultants as having "special features make this site unique in the Site District."
In just over a week, more than 500 individual requests to deny these permits have been sent to the Premier and Ministry of Environment through savetheblandingsturtle.com, a website developed to allow concerned citizens to send a message of opposition to the government in 30 seconds or less.
Ostrander Point is one of those situtions where environmental ethics gets complicated for some. While many believe that wind energy is some form of saviour that will allow us to avoid the real issues of climate change, even some of wind energy's most ardent supporters can't in good conscience support the killing of threatened species. Ontarians have until February 19th to write the government of Ontario with your thoughts on this important environmental issue.
Whether you're for "killing, harming and harassing" birds and turtles (like Gilead Power is) or against this practice, we all enjoy the right to at least express our views to the government, and on a decision like this, the more discussion the better.
]]>McGuinty's Plan to Reduce Ontario's $16-billion Deficit? He's Not Telling.tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//3.12324702012-01-25T19:28:33-05:002012-03-26T05:12:01-04:00John Laforethttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-laforet/Go Transit services, building three new undergraduate university campuses, cutting tuition rates by 30 per cent, and protecting government services from across the board cuts. The Liberals went out of their way to assure voters that across the board cuts to government would not be necessary, and provided precious few details on what their plan was to reign in the deficit.
Just months after Ontario's provincial election one would be hard pressed to find a Cabinet Minister or the Premier discussing the government's plan to implement their election promises. Instead, the focus has shifted to daily reporting on the musings of Don Drummond, who is chair of the "Commission on the Reform of Ontario's Public Sector." In addition to the near daily trial balloons leaking from the much anticipated Drummond Report, when formally released, it is expected to include 400 recommendations on reforming the Government of Ontario. The goal is to provide the province with a plan for erasing the unprecedented $16 billion dollar deficit from Premier McGuinty's last budget by 2017-2018.
The Premier has a draft of Drummond's report on his desk, but he's not sharing it with opposition MPPs or voters. The media are only receiving bits and pieces as the Liberals see fit. A number of special interest and pressure groups have been briefed on the impact to them of Drummond's proposals, yet everyday Ontarians have not been shown the respect they are due to participate in guiding their own destiny.
It is clear the unsustainable spending increases that have seen Ontario's budget grow 70 per cent over the last eight years has led the province to a moment of stark choices and transformational change. There is little doubt the mounting public debt (which has almost doubled while McGuinty has been Premier) must be addressed.
Real people who live and work in Ontario must be central to the decision making and prioritization of what strategies will be employed to reign in the deficit. It isn't enough for the government to pass the buck to an unelected, unaccountable outsider and cherry pick what they feel is best.
Premier McGuinty should make the full report public without delay. He should allow Ontarians to digest it and then begin to decide how to move forward in a manner that protects the key government services Ontarians hold near and dear, while cleaning up the mess eight years of McGuinty economics has caused. ]]>Mike Crawley's Business Record Proves He's No Man of the Peopletag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//3.12034382012-01-12T22:15:36-05:002012-03-13T05:12:01-04:00John Laforethttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-laforet/Pundits have pegged the race for president of the Liberal Party of Canada as being between former Deputy Prime Minister Sheila Copps and Mike Crawley, the President of an internationally-owned, Ontario-focused wind developer.
With the Liberals reduced to just 11 seats in Ontario, electing Mike Crawley president of the party this weekend might be their best chance at attracting crowds in his home province -- even if there are protests against their new president.
Crawley's day job as chief of International Power Canada poses a significant risk to the Liberal Party and makes his calls for grassroots inclusion ring hollow. The "start-up renewable power company" Crawley boosts of having built up and sold to a foreign multi-national has had a devastating impact on Ontario residents who are forced to live in the shadow of Crawley's work.
In June 2010, The OPP was accused by an Essex County resident of using police to intimidate her from protesting the official opening of the $110-million International Power wind turbine project and the company threatened to sue democratically elected councils who chose to put citizens' interests over Crawley's bottom line.
Canada's former Assistant Deputy Minister of Public Health, Dr. Robert McMurtry, alerted Crawley that his industrial wind development was making residents of Clear Creek sick. Crawley and his business partner were asked "what they were prepared to do to extricate (victims) from the toxic environment caused by living in the environs of industrial wind turbines?"
Crawley's platform speaks to, among other things, "engaging Canadians" and "making membership matter." As a businessman in Ontario, Mike Crawley has made citizenship matter less in communities forced to host his projects, and has a proven track record of engaging in legal threats and other intimidation tactics when things don't go his way.
Industrial wind energy was a hot topic in the ridings of Essex, Haldimand-Norfolk, and Bruce-Grey-Owen Sound during Ontario's last general election thanks in part to the shenanigans of Crawley and International Power Canada. The provincial Liberals placed third in both Essex and Haldimand-Norfolk. Essex had been held by the Liberals since the 1990s, even during the Harris years.
Mike Crawley should have better sense than to think with a public record like his, that he is well-suited to be President of the Liberal Party of Canada. Should he not, let's hope for the party's sake, delegates do.
John Laforet is the former Federal Liberal Riding President in Scarborough Guildwood.
]]>The Biggest Story of 2011 for Me? The Historic Federal Electiontag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2011:/theblog//3.11701342011-12-26T14:28:37-05:002012-02-25T05:12:01-05:00John Laforethttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-laforet/Manitoba, Newfoundland and Labrador, Northwest Territories, Prince Edward Island, Ontario, Saskatchewan and Yukon all going to the polls in general election, while Alberta and British Columbia found themselves with new Premiers due to leadership elections.
But no election had as much impact as Canada's May 2nd federal election.
The combined message voters delivered rocked conventional wisdom of Canadian politics and gave us a result like we have never seen before.
Green Party Leader Elizabeth May saw her party shed considerable public support during the campaign period, but was successful in her bid to wrestle a seat in the House away from the second Conservative cabinet minister she has challenged for their job. She is the first Green MP elected to Canada's House of Commons.
For the first time since Confederation, the once mighty Liberal Party of Canada was neither the government or official opposition. Their leader Michael Ignatieff lost his own seat while leading the Liberals to the worst electoral result the party has ever seen.
Ignatieff became the second Liberal leader in a row not to become Prime Minister, a distinction he and Stephane Dion share with Edward Blake, who resigned in 1872 and is the only other Liberal leader not to become Prime Minister.
Jack Layton saw his party fortunes rise dramatically as the NDP gained 66 new MPs. Layton became the first New Democrat to be sworn in as Her Majesty's Official Leader of the Opposition, another historic moment brought to us by May 2nd's election.
Much of Layton's gain was former Bloc leader Gilles Duceppe's pain. The Bloc Quebecois fell victim to the electoral wave dubbed the 'Orange Crush' that swept through Quebec, electing an eclectic bunch of neophytes to Canada's Parliament. Like Ignatieff, Gilles Duceppe lost his seat, and his party went from 49 MPs and being the third party, to just four MPs, below the threshold for party status.
And finally, after years of ruthless campaigning for a much coveted majority government, Stephen Harper finally won his, as the Conservative Party formed Canada's first majority government since the 2000 election, and the first Conservative Majority since 1988.
Canada's May 2nd election and the impact it had on the year have made it the biggest story to me for 2011. ]]>Liberals' Message to Bloggers: Get Losttag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2011:/theblog//3.11659212011-12-22T16:26:38-05:002012-02-21T05:12:02-05:00John Laforethttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-laforet/bloggers media accreditation to their upcoming January 2012 convention contradicts the party's plans to engage Canadians in rebuilding efforts.
The decision demonstrates a lack of recognition of the impact bloggers have on social media and by extension, public opinion. The Liberals have said that bloggers who are affiliated with recognized media outlets will be given media accreditation, while volunteer bloggers who are not Liberal party members (and therefore ineligible to be elected as a delegate) will be expected to pay $1,100 to register to attend the convention. The Liberal Party is choosing to financially disadvantage the little guy in favour of big corporations that own media outlets, who can send representatives for free.
Liberal bloggers appear to be the most incensed by the decision, leaving the Liberal Party's blogging allies, some of whom likely would have sought to attend the convention to sing the party's praises, instead condemning the Liberal decision to discourage bloggers.
What the Liberal Party seems to have missed is that bloggers and traditional journalists cover stories very differently. Blogging has advanced considerably over the years, with many bloggers conducting original research, providing more detailed analysis, and being able to operate without the time and space constraints traditional media has to struggle with.
In 2008, I began blogging on my personal website and as an active Liberal at the time was fairly partisan. In early 2009, when the Ontario NDP held their leadership race and received scant coverage from mainstream media outlets, a friend and I decided to launch a website called Current on the Wire. Our goal was to develop non-partisan, in-depth, new media content for New Democratic bloggers and campaigns to use to help Ontario NDP members learn about their candidates. We were able to get each of the four candidates to sit down with us for 15 minutes for on-camera interviews, and were given media accreditation to the NDP convention without any hassles.
When the PCs held their leadership race in June 2009, my friend and I decided to once again provide non-partisan new media coverage to that campaign and once again found a political party and candidates more than willing to engage with bloggers to share their story.
In many ways blogging and coverage of political events go hand in hand as party members make such a small percentage of the general population that really detailed coverage is most viable when designed for online communities.
The concept of micro-targeting isn't totally lost on the Liberal Party. They did just finish a successful fundraising effort to have a million conversations with Canadians the Liberals believe will support them in 2015. In the video to launch the fundraising drive, the announcer proudly boasts that membership is up, engagement is underway and states: "'but one of the big lessons we learned May 2 is that we need to start reaching out today to the Canadians who support us in 2015. Politics isn't rocket science. It's about people talking to people about the issues they care about."
The Liberal Party of Canada has an opportunity to embrace technology as a tool for rebuilding their damaged brand and engage their supporters. Bloggers provide a valuable avenue to build online support for the party and encourage Liberals to participate in conversations with each other about the issues they care about.
The January 2012 convention is supposed to be about rebuilding the Liberal Party. In that spirit, the Liberals should allow bloggers to be part of the process on a level playing field with other media.]]>Can Flaherty Save Healthcare?tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2011:/theblog//3.11592692011-12-20T13:15:22-05:002012-02-19T05:12:01-05:00John Laforethttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-laforet/proposed replacing the 6 per cent increases with a formula that ties future increases to nominal GDP growth, to ensure future healthcare funding is sustainable.
While Ontario Health Minister Deb Matthews, Nova Scotia's Premier Darrell Dexter, and others cited the federal government's need to fund it's "responsibilities," it became clear the memory of the great Tommy Douglas was not top of mind.
What Tommy Douglas recognized, and has been lost on Canadian premiers who have followed, is that government must live within its means and can't allow government debt to balloon in the pursuit of providing services to citizens.
It does not take inspired leadership to increase spending year after year at rates higher than revenue growth in defense of social programs. Leadership is finding creative solutions to improve frontline delivery, while curtailing cost increases, or recognizing that current service delivery models are valuable enough to tax sufficiently to pay for them.
Ontario Premier Dalton McGuinty's expensive eight year deficit-financed delivery of social programs has recently resulted in Moody's downgrading Ontario's debt to "negative." While Ontario attempts to tame its deficit, the Premier has stated neither healthcare or education spending will be subject to cuts, putting 68 per cent of budgetary expenses off limits. That's over 76 per cent if you include the interest payments on Ontario's debt that represent eight per cent of the budget alone.
In reality, it isn't the refusal for governments to rely on deficit spending to provide services we can no longer afford that imperils our social programs, but the refusal to even discuss opportunities to increase government revenue to support the programs we all hold dear in the absence of cuts.
Challenging economic times and our looming demographic time bomb give our leaders the perfect opportunity to begin having an honest conversation about how best to make the social services Canadians rely on sustainable. Tommy Douglas never mortgaged a generation's future to pay for the services of the day, and neither should Canada's current premiers.
Jim Flaherty's plan for sustainable healthcare funding based on the government's revenue, not a rigid formula, is one approach and places him in closer company with Tommy Douglas than those who are opposing the shift.
The other obvious approach that no politician is flogging at present would be raising taxes to protect the programs they refuse to cut. If neither decreasing spending or increasing revenue is acceptable, our social programs are doomed to become structurally unsustainable with time, something no one wants to see happen.
Many would agree Canada's healthcare system is worth preserving and while it may be easy to attack Jim Flaherty for suggesting one approach, until someone stands up with another approach to address the core problem, it remains the only constructive effort to address the status quo.]]>