2013-05-22T07:12:27-04:00 Paul Hughes http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/author/index.php?author=paul-hughes Copyright 2008, HuffingtonPost.com, Inc. HuffingtonPost Blogger Feed for Paul Hughes Good old fashioned elbow grease. tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2013:/theblog//3.3040041 2013-04-08T17:29:00-04:00 2013-04-09T14:04:15-04:00

Paul Hughes http://www.huffingtonpost.com/paul-hughes/
The promotional collateral co-opts the imagery of the small scale, old school, rural farm. The Calgary Stampede should change the name to Industrial, Factory Farming Aggie Days and use its own bleak images. A quick look at the exhibitors beefs up that latter suggestion, although that list has now been removed from the Aggie Days site.

Encana is the anchor sponsor and BayerCropScience is a major sponsor, along with Agrium, et al. If you read Encana's Corporate Social Responsibility and Sustainability Policy, then someone has their wires crossed over at the new Bow Tower. As the major sponsor, Encana must accept a significant share of the blame for the deception of our children.

Enter the Calgary Board of Education. The CBE sends tens of thousands of our children every year. Children are sent home with propaganda from the event. Apparently Aggie Days is a full fledged partner of the CBE. I guess our children will be taught Creationist theory in science now as well.

It is critical for our children and students that learning is connected to a factual understanding of our world. Aggie Days are an inaccurate portrayal of the conditions on factory farms and battery caged operations within the Industrial Agricultural production system, yet the CBE persists (and insists) that our children be exposed to the deceit.

The Calgary Stampede Aggie Days has repeatedly denied local food and urban ag organizations the opportunity to participate in the event. The goal of making a food connection with students based on hands-on programming is deemed "too political".


Modern agriculture is a mess. Arguably, industrialized beyond recognition, you will not find a single true example of a real world farm at Aggie Days. Profit is king. Return On Investment is the mantra of the modern producer. Producer organizations represent the farmer at Aggie Days and apparently it is no holds barred, with any and all forms of deception permitted in an effort to hoodwink students, children and the public.




This is the 2012 exhibitors list. The 2013 list has been removed:
Agrium
Alberta Barley Commission
Alberta Beef Producers
Alberta Canola Producers Commission
Alberta Chicken Producers
Alberta Egg Producers
Alberta Farm Animal Care
Alberta Irrigation Projects Association
Alberta Milk
Alberta Pulse Growers Commission
Alberta SPCA
ATCO EnergySense
Bar U Ranch NHP
BayerCropScience
Calgary & District Beekeepers Association
Calgary Stampede Heavy Horse Pull Committee & Draft Horse Town
Calgary Stampede Swine Committee
Calgary Stampede Queens' Alumni
Equine Display
Farmer Dave
Grain Display
Limarno Llamas
Potato Growers of Alberta
Science Alberta Foundation
There's a Heifer in your Tank (University of Alberta)
University of Calgary Faculty of Verterinary Medicine

It's very unfortunate that 2013 marks the 5th year for the Calgary Stampede to deny local, sustainable, organic food organizations to participate. If this was Hockey Days, you'd bet Hockey Calgary would be there, promoting to children and students the many ways to become involved in the local system.

And that's the rub... Aggie Days is true to form on that one item. It does not want our children to become directly involved in food production. It simply wants them to be customers. And Encana, the Calgary Stampede, the producer shills and the Calgary Board of Education will do and say anything to keep it that way.

There is a facebook page for this crass charade: Lying to Our Children: Encana's Industrial Aggie Days ]]> tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2013:/theblog//3.2884641 2013-03-15T13:09:31-04:00 2013-05-15T05:12:01-04:00

Paul Hughes http://www.huffingtonpost.com/paul-hughes/ Calgary Co-op voted in favour of eliminating caged eggs and pork in their 24 stores located in Calgary and region. Calgary Co-op boasts a membership of 440,000, making it one of the largest cooperatives in North America.

The successful vote, held right here in Cowtown, the heart of Stampede country, is a forceful statement on farm animal welfare, compassionate approaches to agriculture, sustainable food systems and a strong message to an industry floundering in horrific cruelty.




The vote itself was democratic and the debate on Co-op member Clint Robertson's initiated motion was open. The Parliamentarian, a former member of the PPCLI, kept the speaker's list flowing, allowing all Co-op members an opportunity to speak.

A number of members spoke in favour of the motion, including myself [full disclosure]. Then, out of nowhere, a steady stream of industry lobbyists began to attack the motion. They are a tone deaf lot, not understanding that Co-op members no longer wanted to tolerate the cruel and unethical conditions that these farm animals suffer. Their argument was too little, too callous, too shallow, too cruel, too late. As it stands, their industry is in a race to the bottom. Calgary Co-op members see our agricultural system as a pursuit of quality.

Their industry has been talking about ethical changes to caging and self regulation for decades with no action or results and an actual increase in caging systems. They like to use the oxymoronic term, enriched cages, to dupe the public. They like to deceive the public with the mantra of increased costs, when in fact their infrastructure costs will decrease along with equipment and equipment maintenance costs. Lower overhead and offsets can assist farmers with increasing their margins.



The farmers are not well served by their lobbyists. The idea that the status quo must be maintained, whatever the cost or accompanying evil, is no longer resonating with the consumer. Unlike the message the lobbyists and producer associations brainwash their farmers with, farmers are not prison guards of caged animals. Farmers are a key component of a complex food system that needs to respond to consumer demand, and in the case of the Calgary Co-op, that translates to the elimination of cruelty and substantially increased compassion.

More frightening, is an appalling and eerie sense of entitlement from these detached lobbyists. You get a sense they believe their own propaganda. The insanity of a distorted food system has trapped them in their own lies. They truly believe, as if conditioned, that they are the ordained farmers, the only ones capable of raising farm animals. They exist unaware of the recent and not so recent developments in agriculture and consumers' increased awareness of the horrors of modern agriculture. It is as if they exist in a time warp where there is no google, youtube, twitter and hidden cameras. They seemingly have no knowledge of sustainable agriculture, cruelty free farming, local food systems, compassionate agriculture, free run, free range, cage free, the list goes on, all foreign terms to this band of detached, delusional, quasi defenders of farm animals. A shameless fox in charge of the vulnerable hen house, and the public is fully on to them. In a big way.

Blog continues after slideshow



When the notion of uncaged farm animals who are allowed to exercise natural behaviours, actually see the sun, walk in a field, interact with others of their species -- in essence live within the span of their short existence -- is opposed by industry, you begin to not just have a glimpse, but a full realization of how heartless, cruel and broken the agricultural system has become.

In the end, the Calgary Co-op membership approved the motion and the hens, pigs and consumers won one for a change. The question now is, will other Canadian retailers act on the leadership of the Calgary Co-op members and commit to eliminating products associated with cruelty from their supply chain?



Postscript: The Calgary Co-op has annual sales of over $1 Billion/year. This is the largest Canadian general food & services retailer to ban intensively caged eggs & pork.]]> tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2013:/theblog//3.2854088 2013-03-11T14:09:45-04:00 2013-05-11T05:12:01-04:00

Paul Hughes http://www.huffingtonpost.com/paul-hughes/
It is something consumers across Canada are becoming increasingly concerned about and a Calgary retailer is on the leading edge of farm animal welfare developments.

If Calgary Co-op member, and local food activist, Clint Robertson's motion is successful on Wednesday at their AGM, Calgary Co-op will make history by being the first major food retailer in Canada to begin phasing out the intensive confinement of farm animals, specifically caged pork and battery caged hens for eggs.

This is arguably the single most significant initiative in the context of compassion for farm animals in Canada.

Robertson's motion reads:

"That Calgary Co-op phase out the sale of eggs and pork sourced from intensive confinement cages (sow / gestation stalls & battery cages) within the next three years, since this type of intensive confinement has been widely viewed as inhumane and that in the interim Calgary Co-op work with suppliers to find alternatives not sourced from these types of intensive confinement cages."

I spoke with Stephanie Brown, Director of the Canadian Coalition for Farm Animals, and she was noticeably excited about Robertson's motion, saying, "I believe it is [a first in Canada]. We're really excited that Clint is putting this resolution before the shareholders at Calgary Co-op. We're rooting for the shareholders to make the right decision on behalf of sows and hens across Canada, and support the resolution."

Brown added, "This initiative brings a much-needed focus to the cruelty of mother sows kept in metal crates where they can't even turn around for four months -- their entire pregnancy. Consumers need to know how animals are kept on factory farms, because they have a choice in what they purchase. The treatment of animals raised for food in Canada is an issue whose time has come. Consumers hold the key to change. Consumers should exert their power to tell retailers what they want to buy -- or won't buy -- because of cruel treatment of farmed animals. Calgary Co-op can lead the way in Canada."

Not so much
A call to Lorna Braid, Executive Director of Alberta Farm Animal Care Association (AFAC) yielded an unexpected response, becoming surreal at moments. Braid was candid and seemed conflicted on the issue, which I found odd, considering her organization advocates for farm animal welfare, citing on their website as a guiding principle: "Proper handling of livestock in our care is a moral, social, ethical responsibility." It was less peculiar when I viewed the list of organization's who bankroll AFAC. The list of funders is a who's who of industrial agriculture in Alberta.

Braid did say, "We don't take a stance. A lot of consumers are interested in responsible animal care and the issue of housing and they should have a choice. There are enriched cages and there is no clear decision on the benefits of natural, the research is not conclusive. We don't know if natural is better, as other issues may offset the benefit. We support the industry. Cages have been acceptable for a long time."

So, the organization in Alberta presumably advocating for farm animal welfare begins by stating they do not have a position and then do an about turn, going on to say they do have a position which is to support industry. In layman's terms, this means profit before humane treatment of farm animals. For the animal, this means the status quo, or a continuation of what is often macabrely referred to as Cowshwitz.

This bizarre position brings the entire organization's raison d'être into question. Ostensibly, if your client was no longer in a cage, allowed to indulge in natural behaviour, turn around, get some fresh air, feel the sun and have a small bit of freedom before making the ultimate sacrifice to feed us, you'd be supportive of that development. Not so with the Alberta Farm Animal Care Association. With advocates like this, farm animals haven't got a sows chance in a slaughterhouse of seeing any real change to their intensive confinement.


We'll see on Wednesday if the leadership and membership of Calgary Co-op understands the compassionate rationale behind the motion, the benefits of being leaders in farm animal welfare and the historic significance of returning to the co-operative roots of humane farming and agricultural production.

The Calgary Co-op website proudly states, It's Not Business As Usual.

For the sake of farm animals across Alberta and Canada, let's hope so.






*The Calgary Co-op AGM is this Wednesday at 2pm. Only members of the Calgary Co-op as of 01November2013 may vote. Membership is $1. Calgary Co-op operates 22 stores in Calgary.]]> tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2013:/theblog//3.2689390 2013-02-14T16:36:47-05:00 2013-04-16T05:12:01-04:00

Paul Hughes http://www.huffingtonpost.com/paul-hughes/


Our towns and cities do not function in isolation. They do not exist in a vacuum. Municipalities can learn from one another's experiences. More importantly, citizens can too. Citizens hold municipalities accountable. If we want to improve government performance, we have to hold each and every elected official and bureaucrat accountable. This is no easy feat. Political activists and advocates are vastly outnumbered by Administrators, Bureaucrats and Chieftains/Politicians (ABC). But there is a way to counter the overwhelming odds, and it's already happening right under your nose. It's called social media and it democratizes democracy. It's also ABC's worst nightmare in the rapidly growing world of citizen driven public sector accountability. If you don't believe it, monitor #GOV20 for a few days. Accountability platforms/apps/programs are developing rapidly and it could be said accountability is a growth industry.



True Open Government should be the one common objective for everyone in the public sector. Due to the advent of social media, it is an idea we can finally embrace and see to fruition. Citizens, taxpayers and organizations have the tools to ensure accountability and to follow/track the activities of government. Often referred to as watchdogs, oversight or ombudsmen, it is their turn to shine and shine a light on government activity. Ironically for some, it is often those politicians who rode in on the back of social media that are the last to embrace government accountability and transparency.



An option for citizens is collaboration. Sharing successes and failures from our respective communities can increase the flow of knowledge and create municipal efficiencies. The Municipal Accountability Collaboration (MAC) seeks to do just that by facilitating the open sharing of information amongst citizens with a direct objective of improving our communities.

All citizens and anyone involved in government are welcome to participate.

Here's to putting citizens back on top of the org chart!

Municipal Accountability Collaboration (MAC) on facebook

Municipal Accountability Collaboration (MAC) on twitter]]> tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2013:/theblog//3.2583114 2013-01-30T15:15:07-05:00 2013-04-01T05:12:01-04:00

Paul Hughes http://www.huffingtonpost.com/paul-hughes/ "One's basic nature eventually betrays itself..."

Although the 2nd Canadian Food Summit (April 9/10 Toronto) hasn't even started, the controversy has. In fact, the Canadian food policy world may have it's biggest dust up ever if the Conference Board of Canada (CBoC) continues its tone deaf, stack the deck maneuvering. Rejecting an entire food movement is not a recipe for inclusion and consensus, but the CBoC's myopia does have the elements required for a Food System Donnybrook.



The CBoC's Board of Directors are almost exclusively corporate and the Food Strategy primer sent to potential collaborators is devoid of any reference to Food Justice, Hunger, Household Food Security, Agrarian Reform, Local Food, Food Liberty, Food Dignity, Food Sovereignty or the Right to Food (Article 25 of the UHRD).

The battle lines are drawn, or so it seems. Numerous organizations have attempted to address this issue with the CBoC, but Canada's "foremost independent, not-for-profit research organization" continues to cold-shoulder Canada's just, sustainable and local food movement. This is a common practice of the industrial, corporate food system. It's a "Don't Open the Barn Door" philosophy that is divisive and a significant impediment to true change in the Canadian food system as corporations protect their interests at the expense of Canadians and the future of food in our country. In a nutshell, it's tyrannical.

If you're going to call yourself the Centre for Food in Canada, it is incumbent on you to include all the voices involved in the Canadian food conversation, not just those that can afford to be at the table. The optics are skewed at times to create the illusion of inclusion, only to find those fringe ideas of food justice and local/sustainable food discarded and excluded from the official outcomes. It is because of this approach to a Canadian Food Strategy, that the Conference Board of Canada is unfit to lead this discussion. The CBoC leads a deeply flawed process that has undermined itself through self inflicted philosophical and corporate wounds. Any effort to regain the trust of the Canadian just, local, sustainable food movement, and its practitioners, would have to be of biblical proportions.

Additional insight comes from last year's "Summit", which resulted in this controversy. For the record, no one has ever died from food purchased at a Canadian Farmers' Market or CSA. Unfortunately, that can't be said of the industrial food system.

Where is the Canadian Food System headed if the dialogue continues to be an exclusive exercise? If the following letter is any indication, the tolerance and patience of many Canadians to stand and watch the continued impairment of our food system, at the expense of the health of Canadians, is at an end. Professor Jennifer Sumner, in her response to the Conference Board of Canada's "Canadian Food Strategy" Primer, accurately captures the sentiment of thousands of Canadians working to build a just and sustainable food system. Here it is in its entirety:

********

As many of you know, the Conference Board of Canada is preparing what it calls a Canadian Food Strategy and asking for participation in its preparation. I was contacted in early December by the CBoC and asked to join a consultation in January, which I agreed to. However, when I received the consultation primer (see attached), it was clear to me that the CBoC was not preparing a food strategy for all Canadians, but a food industry strategy that would benefit large players in the global market.

After carefully reading the primer, I sent the letter below, to which I received no reply.

Jennifer Sumner

*********

Drs. Michael R. Bloom and Charles Le Vallée

Centre for Food in Canada

The Conference Board of Canada

Dear Drs. Bloom and Le Vallée

I have received and carefully read the document you provided for the upcoming CBoC Canadian Food Strategy consultation.

I originally agreed to attend the consultation because it seemed as if the CBoC was genuinely trying to address some of the serious issues associated with food in Canada: growing hunger, escalating food-related health problems, ongoing environmental destruction associated with conventional food production and increasing control of the global corporate food system.

Instead, your consultation primer indicates just the opposite: no mention of hunger, no connection between food-related health problems and the corporations who peddle the 'edible food-like substances' that cause these conditions, little recognition of the globally recognized suite of negative environmental consequences of conventional farming, and a call for increasing the scope and scale of the global corporate food system. Indeed, the primer should be titled "Canadian Food Industry Strategy," to honestly indicate to the public that this consultation process not only involves the promotion of the Canadian food industry (as is clear from your first pillar), but also constitutes a vehicle for the food industry to move into the other four pillars - areas that reflect "Canadians' concerns and needs around safety, health, security and sustainability."

A true Canadian food strategy would be focused on, first and foremost, making sure everyone gets fed, much as the Canadian health-care strategy makes sure everyone gets healthcare. In contrast, your strategy aims to promote the visibility and growth of the food industry and to treat Canadians' concerns and needs as private profit opportunities, not public moral obligations.

In addition, your prescriptions represent a virulent form of neoliberal economics that has been acknowledged as responsible for the ongoing global economic crises and clearly only benefits about 1% of the population - in this case the owners, senior managers and shareholders of large multinational food corporations. Instead of putting forward innovative alternatives to this discredited economic model, the Conference Board of Canada wants to

· promote competition over co-operation

· advocate free trade over fair trade

· reduce or eliminate supply management (one of the only economic models that has made farmers successful)

· increase the scale of production and exports (instead of considering small and medium sized, regionally-based production to ensure every Canadian is fed)

· eliminate "unfair" regulations (unfair to whom?)

· incorporate public and private industry standards (which consolidates private oversight of public issues such as food safety)

· frame healthy food choices as new commodities (not behavioural changes such as eating more basic fruits and vegetables)

· promote private, voluntary environmental standards (which do little, if anything, to ensure our environmental future is protected)

I am surprised that the Conference Board of Canada is asking the public to support its promotion of the food industry. While corporate lobbying of government is a regrettable reality, masking such lobbying as a national food strategy and a "shared national vision for food that can promote collaboration and common purpose" is dishonest, self-serving and morally corrupt.

Needless to say, I will only attend your "consultation" if it changes from a one-sided advocacy for a special-interest group to a dialogical endeavour to build a Canadian food strategy that focuses on the concerns and needs of all Canadians, not just the food industry.

Sincerely,

Jennifer Sumner, PhD
Director, Certificate Program in Adult Education for Sustainability
Adult Education and Community Development Program
OISE/University of Toronto

]]> tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2013:/theblog//3.2443183 2013-01-09T18:25:22-05:00 2013-03-11T05:12:01-04:00

Paul Hughes http://www.huffingtonpost.com/paul-hughes/ kids played outside. I grew up before Pong. What am I doing reviewing Minecraft and what the hell is Minecraft anyway?


Default Minecraft player, Steve?

I was introduced to Minecraft by my son, who was nine at the time. I would ask him to stop watching Minecraft videos, which he seemed addicted to. When he started playing, I asked him to get off the computer and get outside. All parents do this, but few of us take the time to truly understand what it is our kids are really doing on that computer. Well my son, now 10, has taught me a huge lesson. He introduced me to his exciting, mystical, pixelated world and then had me watch a documentary on the story behind Minecraft, called "Minecraft:The Story of Mojang" (Mojang being the company founded by Minecraft designer Markus "Notch" Persson, who, according to CNN Tech is "an independent game developer who was willing to experiment with a unique game design, try a risky new online business model and forge a new relationship with gamers.") I now support him having some access to this game, which is a huge breakthrough, because I generally despise video games and lament the days gone by when we played shinny, street hockey, broomball, curled, built snow forts, had snowball fights, received the dreaded "face wash", made snow angels, sledded/tobogganned, skated and just generally being outside in our winter wonderland and in constant motion in order to ward off hypothermia and frostbite. The only game I was allowed to play inside was chess, because my parents said, "It makes you think, not like the idiot box".

What is Minecraft exactly?

As of today, 8,824,139 people have bought Minecraft. It is described as "an open world game that has no specific goals for the player to accomplish, allowing players a large amount of freedom in choosing how to play the game."

It is a super kid-friendly game. It inspires kids and this is where I first noticed my son talking in a hyper animated manner about how cool Minecraft was and how much he enjoyed the experience of playing the game. At least he wasn't talking about how many people he'd killed or how many headshots he made. So the world of Minecraft became more inviting for me as a parent.

Minecraft allows the player to mine and craft almost anything they can conjure. It is a lot like old school lego, where we had to dream up our own designs, before all the kits, prefab models and Star Wars knock offs. It allows the player to create incredible environments and challenge themselves creatively and innovatively.

Schools have made Minecraft part of the curriculum.

Best bonus for me as a parent? There are no guns in Minecraft.

There are legions of people playing the game. Their sense of community is inspiring and the way they express themselves is a beautiful thing for a parent to see. This video with over 45,000,000 views didn't hurt either.

I still want to see my son outside, being physical, getting fresh air and playing with his friends. I also see significant benefit in him playing Minecraft. It is a new world for our children, with many obstacles and dangers. I believe a game changing game such as Minecraft will help him navigate this brave new world with creativity, innovation and compassion. Think of it as the new chess of the 21st century, but instead of the analog 1 vs 1 player dynamic, you're sitting at a table with thousands of players from around the world, creating that world. Ya, this isn't your father's chess game and it sure as hell isn't pong. I'm humbled by the wisdom of my young son to pick a game that I would actually respect and one that develops his character and skill set. Kudos, Mac! Stay away from the creepers!





Special thanks to Mac Delta Hughes for his technical assistance with this blog.]]> tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//3.2389380 2012-12-31T14:28:31-05:00 2013-03-02T05:12:02-05:00

Paul Hughes http://www.huffingtonpost.com/paul-hughes/ SCREW?

A call for a great first step from five prairie mayors.

A common environment shared by almost 3 million citizens over an area roughly the size of a third of Europe. Similar municipal challenges based on geography and climate. Five almost identical visions of municipal sustainability. A suspect acronym, SCREW. And so it is that five Canadian prairie cities: Saskatoon, Calgary, Regina, Edmonton and Winnipeg (SCREW) share multiple parallels and symmetries. Of course each city is entirely unique, yet in many ways, they're nearly identical. Dionne Quintuplet identical.



Is there a way for these prairie cities to work together to save taxpayers money, create efficiencies, improve service delivery, optimize citizen engagement, minimize bureaucracy, increase ROI, share ideas and reach their respective sustainability targets? Could they become better cities by SCREWing things up?

Based on the volume of commonalities, the logical answer is yes. Each city has engaged in a long term vision process with their respective citizens. They each have a long term vision document with targets and goals. And in each city, sustainability is stuck, having run headlong into economic, political and social realities. Each city has a deeply entrenched municipal bureaucracy that functions in a vacuum that is seemingly unaware of the existence of four sibling cities with kindred civic challenges.

An analysis of each city reveals an endless list of civic responsibilities that mirror each other's shared urban reality. Roads, bridges, transit, sewer, garbage/recycling collection, parks, recreation, land use, strategic planning, zoning, bylaws, development, municipal infrastructure, budgets and taxation to name just a few.

Duplication and redundancies, like the aforementioned, are low hanging fruit in the corporate world, targets of administrative cost cutting and potential organizational efficiencies.

Sharing best practices and merging a variety of departments will ultimately create five better, more efficient, more sustainable and less expensive cities to live in for the almost 3 million (and growing) inhabitants of SCREW.

Now if we can just convince the five mayors to sit down and really start SCREWing things up, we'll all be SCREWed in 2013.


Saskatoon, SK
Population: 222,189
Vision document: Saskatoon Speaks
Mayor: Don Atchison

Calgary, AB
Population: 1,096,833
Vision document: imagineCalgary
Mayor: Naheed Nenshi

Regina, SK
Population: 200,000
Vision document: Design Regina
Mayor: Michael Fougere


Edmonton, AB
Population: 817,498
Vision document: The Way We Grow/Transforming Edmonton
Mayor: Stephen Mandel

Winnipeg, MB
Population: 684,100
Vision document: My Winnipeg
Mayor: Sam Katz (Not on Twitter)

Saskatoon, Calgary, Regina, Edmonton, Winnipeg (SCREW) on Facebook]]> tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//3.2302990 2012-12-14T15:40:04-05:00 2013-02-13T05:12:01-05:00

Paul Hughes http://www.huffingtonpost.com/paul-hughes/

Dear Mayor Nenshi, Ald Carra & Mgr Bowen,

Please read the letter sent 14 Dec. 2012 to Animal & Bylaw Services, requesting the reintroduction of the Urban Hen Egg Laying Pilot Project.

The volume of the City of Calgary official policy that supports both the concept of a pilot project and the removal of the bylaw against egg laying hens is simply enormous.

"The Urban Hen Egg Laying Pilot Project will align the City of Calgary with its numerous guiding/vision documents (imagineCalgary, Food Assessment & Action Plan, Fair Calgary, 2020 Sustainability Direction, et al) that support a local, sustainable, healthy food system and the tenets of food justice, food security and the right to food for all Calgarians."

Link: http://www.calgary.ca/CA/cmo/Pages/Office-of-Sustainability.aspx

On behalf of the members of CLUCK, I request that you support reintroducing the Urban Hen Egg Laying Pilot Project.

For your consideration and action,

Paul Hughes
CLUCK


-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Urban Hen Egg Laying Pilot Project: Resurrection
Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2012 12:54:43 -0700
From: Paul
Reply-To: paul
Organization: CLUCK
To: Andrew Bissett & Paul Hughes

Hi Andrew,

I'm requesting that you discuss with Tracey Birch the reintroduction of this pilot project to the SPC/CPS Committee.

A tremendous amount of work has already gone into the design, terms, conditions, references, targets and governance of the Urban Hen Egg Laying Pilot Project. Most of this work (95%) was performed by Animal Bylaw via Bill Bruce (rtd) and his team. I encourage Bylaw to continue to show leadership on this issue and resurrect the pilot. You have my assurance that CLUCK members will willingly cooperate in the implementation of the pilot.

Perhaps more importantly, the Urban Hen Egg Laying Pilot Project will align the City of Calgary with its numerous guiding/vision documents (imagineCalgary, Food Assessment & Action Plan, Fair Calgary, 2020 Sustainability Direction, et al) that support a local, sustainable, healthy food system and the tenets of food justice, food security and the right to food for all Calgarians.

Link: http://www.calgary.ca/CA/cmo/Pages/Office-of-Sustainability.aspx

For your consideration and action,

--
Paul Hughes
CLUCK]]> tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//3.2259932 2012-12-07T17:24:44-05:00 2013-02-06T05:12:01-05:00

Paul Hughes http://www.huffingtonpost.com/paul-hughes/ OMBUDSMAN: The term ombudsman usually refers to an official, appointed by the government or by parliament but with a significant degree of independence, who is charged with representing the interests of the public by investigating and addressing complaints of maladministration or violation of rights by an official body.

An Ombudsman should be arms length, unbiased, impartial and independent with far reaching investigative powers. In the hyper political environment of Alberta, a municipal Ombudsman is essential to a fully functional, fair and effective democracy.

On the issue of an Ombudsman for the City of Calgary, Mayor Naheed Nenshi had this to say:

"A city ombudsman is certainly worth discussing since it's potentially another way to improve accountability within the municipal government. I think we need to carefully consider the ombudsman's responsibilities as well--in the past two years, I've realized how effective the aldermanic and Mayor's offices can be at addressing citizen concerns, so we don't want to inadvertently create more red tape or overlap between them and an Ombudsman's Office."
~Mayor Nenshi

A municipal Ombudsman for Calgary is also an imagineCalgary target, to have been achieved by 2008.


Montreal and Toronto have an Ombudsman's Office for municipal issues.

The Municipal Affairs office of the Province of Alberta has discussed the issue of an official Ombudsman's office for smaller communities.

The Alberta Municipal Sustainability Initiative (MSI) fund is one possible source of financing for a Municipal Ombudsman's Office for communities. Under the operating projects category of the MSI:

"Eligible operating projects include capacity building activities that improve efficiency or effectiveness, municipal services, planning activities, and assistance to non-profit organizations."

Municipal infrastructure need not only be roads, bridges & sewage treatment plants. Democratic & governance infrastructure also contribute to the sustainability of our communities. If Montreal's experience is an indicator of the effectiveness of the Ombudsman's Office, this idea should be given high priority status by Nenshi, Calgary City Council, Municipal Affairs and Premier Alison Redford.

Creating capacity in municipal governance isn't really something the elves can build and throw in Santa's toy bag. It will take politicians and citizens committed to a superior democratic structure to make this one happen. It would be the best Xmas ever if Alberta embraced this exceptional opportunity to craft a truly democratic society.]]> tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//3.2221446 2012-11-30T19:54:23-05:00 2013-01-30T05:12:01-05:00

Paul Hughes http://www.huffingtonpost.com/paul-hughes/
The magnum opus of democratic transparency & sustainability is imagineCalgary.

ImagineCalgary (iYYC or iCal), a 212 page roadmap for Calgary's future created by 18,000 Calgarians in 2006, was authored in part by Calgary's present mayor, Naheed Nenshi. The Office of Sustainability, headed by Carolyn Bowen, now oversees the implementation of iYYC/iCal. Repeatedly, this document has been referred to by all aldermen, bureaucrats, administrators, policy makers and many citizens as defining the way forward. Numerous adopted policy papers at the City of Calgary refer to imagineCalgary.

Clearly closed government is not the objective, because that already exists. Citizens want full frontal governance, 24/7/365. Citizens want access to information and open books, policy, documents & records. We want a see through government that allows citizens to go, do and observe the application of democracy. We want to know how decisions are being made, at every step of the process. Citizens do not want to be told after the fact, that this is the way it is... we want to be part of the process of getting to the way it is. We're all in on this democratic roadtrip. We'll drive, copilot, change the tunes, serve up the beverages, adjust the heat and ensure government doesn't fall asleep... but someone has to open the doors so we can get in the car. Unlock the doors of government and let citizens in, that is the mantra of imagineCalgary, now firmly in the hands of hardened bureaucrats. The language of imagineCalgary is not their mother tongue and they are struggling with just the basic translation, let alone the incredibly lofty and epic targets found within the imagineCalgary tome.

So, it came as some surprise that the meetings about implementing this grand strategy are not open to the public or media.This autocratic policy of the Office of Sustainability & the City Manager's Office, (City Manager is Owen Tobert) is in direct conflict with the core intent and heart of imagineCalgary. The heart of imagineCalgary is true open government, transparency, inclusiveness, responsiveness, engagement, openness & access to all aspects of governance, including decision making. So how is it that the those responsible for its implementation are operating outside of its core objectives?

Consider these statements and targets taken directly from the imagineCalgary Bible:

• T1 By 2016, 80 per cent of Calgarians report that they feel government activity is open, honest, inclusive and responsive.

• Enable continual improvement, accountability and transparency.

• Decision-making is an inclusive process in which broad-based support is actively sought and contributes to continual improvement in people's lives.

• Diversity is valued and all voices are considered in the decision-making process.

• Increase transparency and accountability concerning decisions that affect ecosystems,which includes greater involvement of concerned stakeholders in decision-making.

• It is essential for citizens to feel that the decision-making institutions that represent them are accessible. Included in achieving this target are the elements of accessible information, open engagement processes and inclusive decision-making.

• Create a comprehensive network of diverse communications infrastructure, which will reduce the need for people to travel to in-person meetings in energy-intensive ways.

So, is the imagineCalgary implementation process embracing the very core mandate it aims to achieve? Is this a lead by example and practice what you preach approach? Clearly it is not and this is an issue of hypocrisy that needs to be addressed immediately. Anything less is subversive to the intrinsic elegance of imagineCalgary and a betrayal of the governance dreams of 18,000 Calgarians.]]> tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//3.2188814 2012-11-25T15:48:39-05:00 2013-01-25T05:12:01-05:00

Paul Hughes http://www.huffingtonpost.com/paul-hughes/
The International Meatless Day campaign was first started in India in 1986 by the Sadhu Vaswani Mission- a social service organization with a spiritual aim dedicated to serving mankind, especially the poor and downtrodden. It is also a significant day for Animal Right's groups.

November 25 is also called International Vegetarian Day aka SAK Meatless Day the birthday of Sadhu Vaswani.

If you missed going meatless day, Grey Cup and all, there is the Meatless Monday movement, a tradition that has roots in World War 1 austerity measures.

http://mvs.my/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/meatless-day-nov-25.jpg]]> tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//3.2130425 2012-11-14T12:12:57-05:00 2013-01-14T05:12:01-05:00

Paul Hughes http://www.huffingtonpost.com/paul-hughes/
An initiative in Calgary, 1 Calgary Centre (1CC or on twitter: @1YYCCentre), is offering voters an innovative way to participate in selecting their preferred candidate. According to Brian Singh, co-founder of 1CC, they are organizing in order to inform progressive voters on how to make their vote count the most in a riding held by some form of Conservative, Alliance or Reform party member since 1968. 1CC hopes to assist voters in selecting a progressive candidate and then have that candidate elected, breaking the 44-year conservative trend.

From a progressive's point-of-view, it is ambitious, commendable, daring, timely and incredibly brilliant. From a conservative perspective, it is a nightmare. But will it work? The legitimate effort has a small budget and is officially registered with Elections Canada. A small group of volunteers is coordinating the initiative and they have a growing presence on Facebook and Twitter, with the Twitter account being monitored virtually 24/7. Admittedly, the entire project looks polished, professional and ready for prime-time. Strategic voting has never looked so sexy and coordinated.

The political snapshot has all eight Calgary seats being held by the Conservatives. However, this byelection is potentially up for grabs as the Conservatives have selected (appointed) a weak candidate and the NDP, Liberals & Greens all believe the riding is positioned to make a statement heard across the country. But, as Brian Singh and his team have so correctly identified, the possibility of a disunited progressive vote winning has a statistical probability
comparable to a snowball's chance in hell.

Originally, I felt it was important to speak with the candidates. I spoke to Dan Meades (NDP), Chris Turner (Greens) and Harvey Locke (Liberal). Each individual was articulate, enthusiastic and knowledgeable on the issues facing Calgary Centre. The other thing they all share, and they share this with Joan Crockatt as well, is a conviction that they can win this race. Well, we know three of the four will be wrong. History reveals a Conservative trend, and everyone knows you never bet against a streak... unless a unique circumstance, such as 1 Calgary Centre, arises. Ironically, I no longer believe the candidates have anything to do with the success or failure of the 1 Calgary Centre initiative. Their respective opinions have no bearing on the outcome of the Calgary Centre byelection. Each candidate is doing exactly what they said they would do and exactly what they were chosen to do, and that is run as a viable candidate for their party. In my observation, each is doing an exemplary job and the collective calibre of candidates in the Calgary Centre byelection is unrivaled in Alberta politics.

But, for the voter, this doesn't get anymore difficult. Voters are saddled with a formidable ballot dilemma, essentially redefining a Hobson's choice. Either vote for the preferred progressive candidate as identified by the the 1 Calgary Centre process, or wake up to the status quo, another Conservative victory in Calgary.

How such a collection of healthy, robust and intelligent campaigns in arguably Canada's most diverse and exciting riding can be reduced and distilled down to such a basic, fundamental decision is the paradox of politics. Harper eats that paradox for breakfast, raw. He knows the one thing that will keep him in power for decades is the inability of the progressive parties to agree, compromise and work together for the benefit of all Canadians. So the voters have to do what the parties are intrinsically incapable of, cooperate across party lines and crowdsource a progressive victory. Calgary Centre residents have a historic opportunity to show all Canadians that citizens have the capacity to ultimately decide the outcome of an election. I believe leadership, foresight and wisdom are in the DNA of the citizens of Calgary Centre. As distasteful as it may appear to independently minded progressives, the only option in the Stampede City riding of Calgary Centre is to herd up.]]> tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//3.2013289 2012-10-24T22:18:57-04:00 2012-12-24T05:12:02-05:00

Paul Hughes http://www.huffingtonpost.com/paul-hughes/
Both behemoths of the Canadian hockey community have received demand letters from the CHLPA's legal counsel.
The list of items is extensive, expensive and it is obvious the CHLPA intends to come out of the legal corner with the puck.

From interpreting provincial labour laws (cited in the letters to the CHL and HC) which are being applied to define the relationship that exists between the 1405 players and their 60 teams, it is clear that players are employees and are owed a substantial amount of back pay, easily in the 10's of millions.

"There has been, and continues to be, flagrant breaches of the Employment Standards Act (Ontario), the Canada Pension Plan and the Employment Insurance Act," the letter states and demands players are treated according to employment and labour acts standards.

Grievance outlined by the CHLPA include not paying the players at least the prescribed minimum wage, at least one and one-halftimes the prescribed minimum rate for each hour of work in excess of 44 hours in each work week, and not paying players public holiday pay.

Specifically addressed in the letters are David Branch, 63 -- the only Commissioner of the OHL since its inception in 1974 and President of the Canadian Hockey League since 1996, and Bob Nicholson, 59, the President and CEO of Hockey Canada since 1998 and recently appointed as Vice President of the International Ice Hockey Federation.

Every team in the CHL was sent the letter, including each team owner.

The CHLPA's governing body released a statement today to media and public, stating "The CHLPA is pleased that the players executive board has voted to act on the numerous and decade-long violations that the CHL unlawfully withheld payments to players for their services on and off the ice as employees.

"For years the CHL and its owners, along with Hockey Canada, the self-imposed governing
body of hockey in Canada, has turned a blind eye to this violation of the employment standards act."

Hockey Canada officials were contacted for their response. "No comment", said Andre Brin, their spokesperson.

Brin then proceeded to suggest I was being rude, although I had numerous conversations with his staff that were all brief and uneventful. A personal attack as a result of requesting sensitive info from Fortress Puck is common when investigating highly controversial subjects, as commonplace as a bodycheck in hockey.

"We hereby demand the OHL and Teams to forthwith comply with the legislative working conditions in Ontario. In the event that these ongoing violations are not immediately rectified, please be advised that we intend to commence legal proceedings."

In hockey, this has significant repercussions for all involved at the major junior, or junior A tier 1 level, the last stage before being drafted and possibly playing in the National Hockey League.

CHL Players lace up for 68 to 72 games during their regular season. Exhibition games and playoffs can easily add another 20-30 games to their year. Seasons start in late August and run continuously until May, when the Memorial Cup, the premier CHL tournament, is played.

During this period, players are training daily and on the ice six and sometimes seven days a
week. The travel schedule is intense for every team and especially so in the Western Hockey League (WHL), where distances take players as far north as Prince George, B.C. and Prince Albert, Sask., as far west as Victoria, B.C. and Portland, OR, and as far east as Brandon, Man.

Players receive a $50 a week stipend on average. They are provided with equipment, a billet, access to training facilities and transportation to games. They must use their education fund within 12-18 months of their last CHL game. Players forfeit their American college system NCAA eligibility.

Hockey Canada looks at CHL players as amateurs. The 1405 CHL players, of 620,000 registered players in Canada, are the only players to play for commercial franchises providing to entertainment fans what the CHL markets as a professionally operated consumer product.

I also spoke with Kelly Kisio of the Calgary Hitmen. He was polite in declining any comment and repeatedly referred me to the WHL head office and WHL Commissioner Ron Robison. Kisio was very hesitant to comment on anything, to the point where even a basic question on the team's performance was a struggle for him, as if orders had been given to a soldier. Intimidation by rank permeated our conversation.

Intimidation is an unfortunate reality in junior hockey.

Anyone who's been involved on-ice or in the bowels of a junior organization can testify to the authenticity of such a statement.

Junior hockey is at times more military than the military. I know, I served with a Canadian infantry regiment for 4 years and coached hockey for 30 years. I've witnessed the eery similarities between the two approaches to the development our youth.

Junior players are Canada's on-ice army, winter warfare experts involved in almost daily skirmishes with enemy forces. But the life expectancy, to extend the metaphor, is atrocious in hockey, with 98% of players exiting the game at the end of their puck career.

An attrition rate like that, and at such a high cost, begs more insight into the psychology of the player and the social constructs that apply to such a situation.

Sixty-three per cent of Alberta-based CHL teams have rostered players that are legally recognized as adults, 18 and older. What makes an adult commit so intensely for a dream that they will do it for 1/300th or even less, of his market value. That's like a $300/hr lawyer working for $1.00/hour.

Hockey is a pay to play system and junior hockey is the transitional transect in the hockey-as-revenue world. But something is starting to look a lot like Kamp Krusty, and yes, without hyperbole, this is a thousand times worse than Vietnam.]]> tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//3.2003840 2012-10-22T20:17:25-04:00 2012-12-22T05:12:01-05:00

Paul Hughes http://www.huffingtonpost.com/paul-hughes/
How did an ostensibly savvy player and politician like Danielle Smith become so off side?

Enter Ray Yechtel, a Red Deer chef and father, who tweets as @lyechtel. Yechtel suggests an idea to the twitterverse, Don Braid, Calgary Herald columnist & Danielle Smith, leader of the provincial Wildrose Party. Yechtel tweets: "is there no way to cook it so its safe and feed the hungry???"

Smith responds, modifies the tweet (MT) and adds a comment of her own, "I agree. We all know thorough cooking kills E. coli. What a waste."

This is when things jumped from the frying pan and into the fire for Smith.

Smith's tweet was picked up quickly in the hyper political climate of Alberta politics. Regardless of how this is spun it was unwise and specifically for one reason, the mention and rementioning of "the hungry" and a reference to XL Meat in the same tweet.

By isolating that demographic, "the hungry", a deeply entrenched bias of Ray Yechtel was revealed. By sharing this view and stating "I agree," Smith joined Yechtel and stepped into an ideological minefield with clown shoes on. This isn't going to end well for Smith.

I offer an explanation. It is an out of context, outside of experience, spatial awareness problem. The issue is not the tweet nor Smith's response. Certainly Smith did not create the XL Food crisis nor hunger. What she did create however, is the digital political petri dish for those issues to come together to breed the perfect storm. The volatile combination of being the leader of the opposition, a nationwide food crisis, epic associated chaos in the form of millions of pounds of recalled meat and then add a deeply revealing, albeit unintentionally insensitive comment and voilà, you have the equivalent of a social media-driven bench brawl.

If we are to believe Smith's subsequent clarifying comments, at the heart of this political train wreck is a tweet taken out of context. It is less than clear what meat was being referred to as some of the meat had actually tested negative for E. coli. Grouping all the meat together is by default and an occupational hazard of 140 characters, well known to all who indulge politically on twitter.

Secondly, the outside of experience angle refers specifically to Smith's capacity to display true empathy for "the hungry." She is not alone here, not by a long shot. In fact the desensitized-to-the-plight-of-the-unwashed-masses room is very crowded. Smith is simply guilty of not having the very real experience of being hungry or poor. Had she experienced this harsh reality, she may have responded with more compassion, cognizance and street savvy than can be found in "I agree."

And finally, the tweet reveals a deficit in spatial awareness. Again, Smith is not unique here. Alberta is home to many disconnected politicians and bureaucrats, eerily unacquainted with the ubiquitous reality of an ever challenging, low income existence. Smith, and a plethora of other politicos, are without a map in the poverty landscape, of which the pitfalls are multiplicitous. Smith stepped directly into the fray and those that occupy the anti-poverty community are understandably unforgiving of shallow comments by privileged politicians. Ironically, tweets and comments like this are sustenance to those grounded in a harsher reality. Smith then, unwittingly, has fed the hungry. Unfortunately for all involved, the calories are empty, devoid of nutrition.]]> tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//3.1934133 2012-10-02T18:41:59-04:00 2012-12-02T05:12:01-05:00

Paul Hughes http://www.huffingtonpost.com/paul-hughes/ Establishment 38 & E. coli O157:H7
The increasingly Orwellian nature of our Food System

"All products currently at this plant are under CFIA detention and control."
~from the Statement on E. coli O157:H7 Investigation by the CFIA, Canadian Food Inspection Agency

Establishment 38 is not a lunar outpost operated by Weyland-Yutani. It is a slaughterhouse and meat processing plant in Brooks, Alberta, operated by XL Foods Inc. The CFIA (Canadian Food Inspection Agency) has suspended the operating license of Establishment 38 because of the detected presence of E. coli O157:H7. Another food recall, this one crossing almost all provincial borders, is today's sobering headline reality. While the scientists, researchers and investigators of the CFIA have E. coli O157:H7 under the microscope, Canadians have also placed Canada's food safety system on a slide and we're collectively scrutinizing how we got ourselves into such a pickle.

Our massively complex global food system involves billions of supply chain transactions daily.
The relationship with the consumer has evolved and citizens must diligently participate in the food equation in order to prevent food borne illnesses. But, do we have the skills to be active participants in a food system we interact with on multiple occasions daily?

Certainly independent and arms length inspection of food production and processing should be the standard, but it isn't. Consumers would consider a scenario where movie producers critique their own films to be unacceptable. The same logic applies to our food. We require unbiased and scientific analysis of our food production, processing, packaging, distribution, retailing and preparation facilities and institutions, yet this does not exist, even remotely, in any manner that could be safely termed failsafe.

We cannot rely solely on slaughterhouses/processors like XL Beef and Cargill (the two largest processors in Canada) to ensure food safety. They are, for the most part, self regulated. We cannot rely on the CFIA, as they only monitor processors-reported-data and conduct random testing. We cannot rely on the retailers, as they are not presently equipped for such stringent analysis of our food. In fact, there are no guarantees associated with our food and its safety. Such is the landscape of food production and consumption in the 21st century for the majority of Canadians.

Wait... No guarantees around the safety of food consumed by Canadians? This is the grim reality of our highly industrialized food system which presently feeds 99 out of 100 Canadians.

Where's the safety?

The very real scenario of a massive beef recall involving millions of pounds of processed and packaged beef is upon us, again. It illustrates the precarious nature of an industrial food system and its unstable relationship with food safety. Three Billion pounds of beef are processed in Canada every year. It ends up on our plates in a variety of products. The trust we have in our food to be safe from pathogens rests with the food industry. This is a huge responsibility borne by numerous agencies, producers, processors & retailers. Whenever & wherever food is handled, it is vulnerable to pathogens and contamination. Many Canadians are unfamiliar with even basic food handling protocols. The industrial food system has become so ubiquitous and efficient, we only think about food when we are hungry. A chasm exists in the minds of Canadians as to where our food comes from and how seemingly, it magically appears on our plates.

Intrinsic in a system that operates at such a scale is failure. There appears to be significant gaps in precision control of the present food safety system. Without a coordinated national and provincial strategy on food safety, the system will continue to only manage the risk. The objective should be the eradication of pathogen risk to the consumer, but this is an epic target for a complex food system that feeds 35 Million Canadians daily. The simple existence of so many variables based on the variety in the food chain dictate that we will continue to see an increase in food borne illness as our consumption levels increase annually. As consumers, in the absence of a meticulously coordinated national food safety strategy, we must do everything in our power to eliminate errors in food handling where we have the final say... in our own kitchens. Apart from that hyper controlled environment, we must default to trust in a system that continues to expose its weaknesses and subsequent inherent dangers to the populace. As the end user, we have a responsibility to demand that all the players in the food system communicate, strategise and implement a vastly superior food safety regimen to the one that is presently failing Canadians.]]>