“If we go back, I’m afraid that we will be the next family to be killed.”

Roma Refugees in Canada face uncertain future

Marie Alcober

When Mark Horvath was four years old, the man living with his mother was enraged when he found out that they were of Roma descent. He threatened Judit Kiss with a gun and left Korom, the northeastern Hungarian village they were living in, with little Mark in tow.

Kiss enlisted the help of a local doctor to approach police and arrest the man who kidnapped her child. Soon after Mark was reunited with his mother, the family moved to Hungary’s capital, Budapest, hoping that the bigger Roma population in the city would mean more tolerant Hungarian neighbours.

But it wasn’t what they expected. Kiss, 49, a trained nurse back in Korom, could not find one entry-level job that any employer would let her fill.

“It is because she’s Roma,” Horvath said.

There is an estimated 12 million Roma currently facing exclusion, violence, and ill-treatment in Europe. According to an Amnesty International report, the travellers or gypsies, as they are commonly known in Europe, score the lowest on key social measures such as employment, education, and healthcare compared to ethnic nationals.

For the 800,000 Romani in Hungary, persecution from the increasing presence of the extreme right-wing Jobbik party in the Hungarian parliament is steadily rising. Critics have called the party anti-Semitic in addition to anti-Romany.

Attacks in the form of drive-by shootings, beatings, and death threats demonstrated by burning swastikas have driven Roma refugee numbers into Canada resulting in 4,423 refugee claims in 2011, up from only 2,296 from the year before.

But the family is safe – for now. Horvath is now 18 years old, sitting beside his mother and older brother, Janos Horvath, in a Mississauga church basement.

Janos, 29, first heard about Canada’s refugee protection system when his cousin claimed refugee status two years ago. And so he came too, along with his wife Eva Ronto, 24, and daughter Virag, 3.

“A lot of Hungarians don’t like us,” Janos said.  “They want to kill all the gypsies.”

According to him, Canada is different – and he likes it. He says there is no discrimination here and no one minds their broken English and heavy accents.

Janos and his family lived in Niagara since February of last year while he took ESL (English as Second Language) courses and his wife worked at a motel.

Janos is now looking for a job in the Greater Toronto Area because an immigration judge ruled that he can’t stay in the country if he doesn’t find employment within this month.

“I’m scared. And I’m scared for my family,” Janos said. “If we go back, I’m afraid that we will be the next family to be killed.”

A year after Janos Horvath’s family came to Canada, minister of citizenship and immigration Jason Kenney proposed new legislation that would “protect Canada’s immigration system” from immigration abuse that’s costing taxpayers approximately $170 million.

Roma refugees have been pouring into Canada for the past few years after visa requirements for Hungary were lifted in 2007, but a recent spike in claims in the past year has prompted the government to review the Canadian refugee protection system. Kenney expects to start implementing the changes to the immigration system starting this fall.

Under Bill C-31, the minister would have the power to draw up a definite list of safe countries without consulting a human rights committee whose experts would be more versed with varying levels of persecution of minority groups in democratic countries.

Anyone who is rejected because they come from a country on the safe list would no longer be allowed to appeal the decision. They would be deported without proper examination of the conditions they are going back to.

Although there has been increasing attention on the persecution of the Roma population in Europe, Kenney does not think Roma-Hungarians deserve the safety that Canada offers, maintaining that Hungary’s membership to the European Union should reassure the minority group an incoming crackdown on discrimination from the Hungarian government.

But the Horvath family talks about men who used to threaten the Romani and Jewish church-goers in their small village; men in heavy clothing who hold up signs reading “Kill The Gypsies.”

These far-right vigilantes who patrol eastern Hungarian villages with large Roma populations, associate themselves with a group called Vedero or Defense Force and have made recent headlines for stirring racial hatred towards the minority group.

“So many of us are sent back because the judge thinks Hungary is safe. But my country lies,” Horvath said.

Mark Horvath is temporarily attending Glenforest Secondary School while his mother attends ESL classes and looks for a job. They are still waiting for a hearing regarding their refugee status.

The CETA-stration of Canadian Municipalities

Pending trade agreement with EU only benefits big business

Chera-Lee Hicox

As Canada negotiates its furthest reaching free trade agreement to date, cities and towns across the country are sounding warning bells that it could change local governance as we know it.

The Canadian government is negotiating a Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA) with the European Union. The accord goes far beyond the reach of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), offering unrestricted trade in goods, services and investments between the 27 EU nations and all levels of Canadian government.

“The first thing to realize is that it [CETA] involves far more than trade,” says Scott Sinclair, Senior Research Fellow with the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives (CCPA). He warns of the potential for the deal to greatly affect municipalities’ ability to govern.

The agreement has become known as the “next-generation”  deal because of the degree to which it includes all aspects of trade, covering intellectual property, standards and regulations, settlement dispute resolutions, services, investments and government procurement.

The biggest business leaders in Canada and Europe have been the driving force behind the negotiations. They stand to profit, particularly through the agreement’s offer of sub-national procurement contracts, which is creating worry and opposition within municipalities.

Municipal-level governments traditionally use procurement contracts to benefit the local economy, opening bids, or a tender contracts, that target local businesses. These local contracts create jobs and opportunities in the region, and and can promote certain kinds of development policies.

But under CETA, non-federal contracts, formerly exempted from free trade agreements, will soon be open to any and all competition, and not limited to local businesses or groups.

For example, the City of Charlottetown recently announced an $18 million combined sewer contract that will be opened up to local Maritime engineering, construction and water treatment companies.

For a major project such as this, Charlottetown might look to local contractors for the construction services in order to create jobs in the community. The project may also use the tenders to support environmental or other development initiatives.

However if CETA becomes law, Charlottetown would lose its authority to choose to hire locally and to choose to which parties to grant the procurement contract.

The EU is pushing for a “non-discrimination”  clause within the CETA agreement that would mean the procurement terms would apply to all levels of government: when any government calls a bid, it must be open to foreign investors as well as local or national ones.

Minimum limits (or “thresholds”) are in place to distinguish projects and services that are worthwhile to open to foreign investors, which allow smaller contracts to remain outside the purview of the CETA. These limits have been criticized as being too low; they are modelled off of World Trade Organization figures and are set at $340,600 for goods and services and $8.5 million for construction projects.

Charlottetown city councillor Cecil Villard admitted that while the thresholds pose little to no threat for a municipality the size of his city, larger municipalities have much to lose. “My first reaction was that I would be more concerned about the level of thresholds if I were a big city. Toronto’s, Vancouver’s, and Montreal’s are sure to feel the impact,” Villard told The Dominion in an interview.

In fact, municipalities have been calling for a complete exemption from the agreement. The City of Toronto passed a resolution on March 6 demanding its exemption from CETA. And Toronto is not alone: Montreal, Hamilton, Burnaby, Prince Albert and Kingston have all passed resolutions to safeguard their rights to local governance.

The Federation of Canadian Municipalities (FCM) has submitted seven principles to International Trade Minister Ed Fast and the negotiating team. The principles lay out the protections it would like to see in CETA. The Council of Canadians and the Canadian Union of Public Employees (CUPE) have also launched a major national campaign to educate and empower the public on the potential consequences of CETA.

As pointed out in a recent NDP report, CETA “deprives provincial and municipal governments of crucial economic levers, particularly during economic downturns, to use government purchasing to stimulate the economy and encourage local spinoffs.”

CETA fails to recognize the autonomy of municipalities and is solely playing to the interests of big businesses, say its critics. “It’s a bill of rights for corporations,” according to Leo Broderick, Vice Chair of the Council of Canadians.

This article was originally published by The Dominion.

“We Are Ontario” Campaign Key to Ontario Budget Concessions

John Rose

On April 21 more than 10,000 workers and activists met at Queen’s Park in Toronto to protest Liberal Premier Dalton McGuinty’s proposed budget. Flags from the province’s largest unions could be seen blowing in the cold spring wind, and workers from across the province expressed their anger and concern over public sector cuts.

The rally and march were organized by the Ontario Federation of Labour (OFL) and a new campaign called “We Are Ontario.” The campaign is designed to challenge cuts to jobs and services.

About 10 speakers from over 90 unions and community groups took turns at the microphone to comment on the budget. These included representatives from the Ontario Federation of Labour, Canadian Union of Public Employees, Ontario Secondary School Teachers Federation, Elementary Teachers Federation of Ontario, Ontario Public Service Employees Union, Public Service Alliance of Canada, Canadian Auto Workers, the NDP, and representatives from the Canadian Federation of Students, Colour of Poverty and other community organizations. It was a strong show of solidarity from across the private and public sectors.

Sid Ryan, president of the OFL, spoke against the budget saying it will cut funding for hospitals, schools and social assistance. Many speakers talked about the impact of the budget on workers and the most economically vulnerable people in the province, and some called for social assistance, at the very least, to be increased to the levels during the Mike Harris years.

Recognizing the precarious economic environment, speakers reminded the government how difficult it is to live off of the current low rates of social assistance, and how cuts disproportionately affect new immigrants and racialized communities.

There was a common theme reiterated by the speakers that the current economic crises were not caused by workers, and that workers should not have to pay for it. Calls for increasing corporate taxes, and tax on high-income earners were almost unanimous.

With Tim Hudak and the Progressive Conservatives dedicated to voting against the budget, there were questions about whether the NDP would support it, or vote against it and force an election.

Labour leaders at the rally largely supported Andrea Horwath’s attempts to negotiate progressive changes to the proposed budget, and she committed herself to doing so at the rally.

In the end, she followed through. McGuinty agreed to a 1 per cent increase to OW and ODSP, which will constitute $55 million in social assistance expenditures. In addition, he agreed to a 2 per cent surtax on high-income earners making more than $500,000 a year. This is projected to raise $470 million in 2013-14 to be allocated toward deficit reduction. The budget passed, with the NDP abstaining from the vote.

Following the budgets passage, Ryan was quick to give credit for the budget concessions to the “We Are Ontario” campaign.

“We were the catalysts for all of the positive elements in the final budget deal that was eventually brokered,” stated Ryan in an April 27 press release.

“‘We Are Ontario,’ brings together 90 community and labour organizations and is poised to fill the void left by the Occupy Movement,” Ryan added. “Recovering the billions of dollars owed to the public treasury by corporations is our next goal. We want that money, for ourselves, our public services and our futures.”

Conservatives set to shut down three federal prisons and renowned programs

Critics say proposals are not evidence-based

Tyler Roach

On April 19 the Conservative government announced it had begun the two-year process to close three federal prisons and multiple prison programs in Ontario and Quebec, including Canada’s most notorious prison, the Kingston Penitentiary.

While much of the attention has centred around the infamous people who have spent time living in the Kingston Penitentiary, media, the public and prisoners’ rights groups have begun to ask questions about the prison closures and the effect of Bill C-10, the Conservatives “tough on crime” legislation.

Minister of Public Safety, Vic Toews, has stated that the government is expecting to relocate approximately 1,000 inmates to prisons in other jurisdictions.

“The time has come to recognize its crumbling infrastructure, costly upkeep and severe limitations in effectively managing a population of maximum-security male offenders and, in the case of Leclerc Institution, medium-security offenders,” stated Toews.

The government believes closing these two institutions will save more than $120 million dollars.

Critics of Bill C-10, however, are questioning the closure of the federal prisons due to the bills potential to dramatically increase the prisoner population in Canada.  Two of those critical voices are the federal budget watchdog Kevin Page and the Ontario Liberal Party Correctional Services Minister Madeleine Meilleur.

In February, Kevin Page issued a report questioning the costs associated with Bill C-10 arguing that if the provisions in Bill C-10 were the law in 2008-09 the federal government costs would have reached an additional $8 million and that the provincial governments could expect an extra $137 million price tag. Page’s report also stated that the average cost per offender could rise from $2,600 to $41,000.

Madeleine Meilleur has also questioned Toews’ perceived savings saying that the Ontario government is “already housing some of their inmates because they don’t have space in their federal penitentiary and now they’re closing one of their larger ones, so I don’t understand their decision.”

Meilleur has stated that the Ontario Liberals expect the crime bill to cost the Ontario people an additional $1 billion dollars over the next four years.  With C-10 in place, “there’ll be more people that are being put in jail, so we’ll need more beds. So, it’s going to put pressure on the province because we are already housing some of their clients,” said Meilleur.

Vic Toews has responded to these concerns arguing, “the influx of new prisoners originally predicted is not materializing” and that the Conservatives can close these prisons confidently with “no intention of building any new prisons.”

Recently, however, the federal government has come under attack when designs for the Collins Bay federal prison upgrades were made public as the plans show that standard prison cells are being designed with the capacity for double-bunks.  Bunk beds in long-term prison cells do not meet United Nations standards.  The Conservatives have stated that the cells do not currently have double bunks but are being built with metal brackets in place to allow for quick retrofitting in the case where it is needed.

The NDP critic Jack Harris questioned the Conservatives’ motives acknowledging that Correctional Services Canada currently reports that 13 per cent of male prisoners in a federal centre are living in double bunk cells and that that number is expected to rise to 30 per cent.

Speaking towards Bill C-10 and the governments plans for double bunks, Harris said, “The prudent planning would be to avoid the kinds of prisons policies that they’ve got now, which is going to lead to more violence, people with less rehabilitation after being in prison and coming out being more dangerous offenders than when they went in.”

Along with closing three prisons, the Conservatives 2012 budget also saw the Federal prison rehabilitation program Life Lines cut. Correctional Services Canada (CSC) describes Life Lines as a “collaborative project of CSC, National Parole Board and other Community organizations aimed at supporting ‘lifers.’”

The Life Lines rehabilitation program received multiple awards and is currently being used as template for the rehabilitation of consistent re-offenders in other countries.  It is hailed as a unique program because it uses a mentoring program using “lifers” currently on parole to help and support other offenders facing life sentences.

Speaking on behalf of the St. Leonard’s society, one of the community organizations in charge of Life Lines, Skip Graham stated that Life Lines is, “the most practical, humane program that has proven itself, and it’s the one they’ve decided to eliminate, so it’s just politics.

Despite its international recognition and the concerns of organizations such as St. Leonard’s Society, in a letter replying to the CBC, Vic Toews spokesperson Julie Carmichael wrote that “It wasn’t producing any results that improved public safety. We will not spend a dollar on corrections that is not necessary to keep Canadians safe.

Hamilton Steelworkers forced to give in on pensions

U.S. Steel loses in court

By James Burrows, News Editor

Employees of U.S. Steel in Hamilton finally have a collective agreement in place. But steelworkers in Hamilton have seen better days.

After a yearlong lockout, pensions have taken a significant blow and morale is not high. In October, Local 1005 of the United Steelworkers announced that it had reached an agreement with US Steel.

In November of 2010, workers at U.S. Steel’s Hamilton Works were locked out when the union refused to let their membership vote on the companies offer, an offer that asked for significant concessions.

The new agreement represents a serious setback for a local that helped shape union politics in Canada. The agreement sees no increases in wages over three years, but rather includes a $3,000 ratification bonus for each of the approximately 750 workers.

The primary fight, however, was over pensions. U.S. Steel wanted to force a defined contribution pension plan on new workers, rather than the defined benefit plan the union wanted to keep.  U.S. Steel won this concession and new hires will now be under a union-administered group RRSP. Under a defined benefit pension, workers are guaranteed an income upon retirement.  Under the new proposal this guaranteed pension will no longer exist and U.S. Steel will simply contribute $2.50 per hour worked to the group RRSP.

Several studies, and even financial institutions themselves, have noted that group RRSPs often provide little security upon retirement, as they are often open to market fluctuations and can be withdrawn by workers over the course of their working life, often leaving little left for retirement.

Also lost was pension indexing for current retirees. Retirees’ pensions will no longer be indexed to inflation but each employee will receive a $1,000 payment, in lieu of indexing, to retirees making less than $1,500 per month.

Pensions have been an issue since US Steel bought Stelco and renamed its Hamilton operations Hamilton Works in 2007.  At the time the new owners wanted to remove two provisions that Stelco had agreed to while it was restructuring and under bankruptcy protection.

At the time Stelco was prohibited from paying out dividends until pension plans were fully funded and required that the company put extra money into the pension plan if a certain amount of profit was made.  When U.S. Steel asked the courts for these to be removed, they agreed.  Given the profitability of U.S. Steel at the time, Local 1005 was immediately concerned that this was a sign of things to come.

Under the Investment Canada Act, a foreign company can be forced to agree to terms that provide a “net benefit” for Canada. In the case of U.S. Steel’s purchase of Stelco, required the steelmaker to produce just over 13 million tons of steel for three years and employ an average of 3,105 workers at its Lake Erie and Hamilton operations. This was to expire in 2010 but, in the spring of 2009, US Steel reduced its operations in Canada and fired many of its employees, breaking its agreement with the Canadian government.

The federal government subsequently fined U.S. Steel and is asking for $10,000 a day going back to November 1, 2008, and is demanding jobs and production promises for three years beginning whenever a final court decision is handed down.

As a result U.S. Steel filed a Notice of Motion challenging the constitutional validity of two sections of the Investment Canada Act. The steel company believed that its right to a fair hearing and its right to the presumption of innocence was violated under the Act and amounted to a violation of their rights under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

In the spring the Federal court of Appeal ruled against U.S. Steel, stating that it did not violate section 11 of the Charter because it did not meet the test for a criminal proceeding.  Last week the Supreme Court of Canada refused to grant leave for appeal.

U.S. Steel has claimed that the downturn in the economy has negatively affected its operations and has locked out workers at both of its Ontario operations as it has fought for union concessions over pensions. The downturn, however, did not seem to negatively affect the company’s president, who saw his salary rise from $3.5 million in 2009 to $12.1 million in 2010.

The federal NDP and the United Steelworkers believe that this is why closed-door deals with foreign companies should never happen. On November 24, Chris Charlton, MP for Hamilton Mountain, tabled a private members bill that called on the government to release complete details of the deal that allowed U.S. Steel to purchase Stelco in the first place.

In July, Pittsburgh based U.S. Steel announced profits of $209 million despite the lockout, which the company has claimed cost it $40 million dollars up to that point.

The pension troubles seem to be spreading as well. Hamilton’s other steel company, Dofasco, whose workers have not historically had a union, is also cutting 700 jobs and are switching to a the same pension system that Local 1005 fought against.  Dofasco has historically kept peace with workers by following closely with what Local 1005 has won in the past from Stelco and U.S. Steel.

These cuts come just a year after Dofasco was given $43 million dollars by the provincial government to improve its Galvalume production, as part of its Open Ontario initiative, which was designed to, “create new job opportunities and help promote economic growth.”

According to a Local 1005 newsletter, this is one more example of how, “the government’s schemes to hand over public money to subsidize private interests must be ended.“

Local 1005 have also stated that, “the government and media should stop disgracing themselves by spouting all these fine words about ‘job creation’.”

Local 1005 once numbered 14,000 members but has seen a steady decline since the early 1980s.

New Flavour on Roncy

A Review of Barque Smokehouse

By Jessica Finch

Jonathan Persofsky and David Neinstein are bringing new flavour to Roncesvalles Village with their smokehouse restaurant, Barque.

Located at the corner of Roncesvalles and Geoffrey streets, Barque is at the heart of this up-and-coming neighborhood. The village has seen its fair share of small businesses suffer over the past few years due to extensive roadwork along the main street. Construction finally wrapped up this past June, and Roncy was primed for the smokehouse’s debut.

Barque, pronounced Bark, opened in April and has quickly proven to be a welcome addition to the neighbourhood. The name is a variation on the word barbecue, and also refers to the outer coating of barbecue meat. With authentic slow roasted brisket, ribs, and signature dishes, Barque offers a higher-end BBQ experience.

“Timing was perfect for the area and business has been incredibly positive since April,” says Persofsky, one of the restaurant’s co-owners. Packed almost every night, Barque has been drawing hungry crowds with their weekly Family Night.

Family Night at Barque offers a set menu at three sittings throughout the night and includes delicious appetizers, main and dessert dishes. “It’s like a dinner party! We wanted to invite people over for dinner ideally every night,” says Persofksy. While Family Night is only once a week, diners can enjoy a host of delectable, classically smoked treats the rest of the week, including ribs, chicken and their soon-to-be famous brisket. For Jonathan, the sampler platters are a particular favorite allowing customers to choose three meats and two sides that way, he says, “There’s a little bit of something for everyone.”

The restaurant also boasts some unique creations like pulled duck tacos and brisket poutine, adding a twist to the routine barbecue fare. The duck tacos are more of a tortilla and feature as a starter on the dinner menu as well as occasionally on Family Night. “The mix of crispy duck and soft taco works really well together, it was one of my favorites,” says diner Aline Groves.

Although it’s mostly known for its dinner menu , the restaurant also offers brunch and lunch. Prices at Barque are average for the selection and portions, with the most expensive dinner dish, aside from the sampler platters, being the smoked beef tenderloin at a reasonable $30.00.

Barque’s signature sauces and rubs will be on sale soon for the holiday season. For more information or to make a reservation online visit www.barque.ca.

Decision on Mega-Quarry Delayed

Active opposition to project forces environmental assessment

By Marsha Ellis

Fierce opposition to a proposed mega-quarry in Southwestern Ontario has resulted in the project being delayed for some time.  Over the past eight months community groups and concerned citizens have argued that the quarry could be disastrous for the environment and undermine Melancthon Township’s agricultural economy.

The Highlands Company, a Boston-based hedge fund company, proposed to use 2,400 acres of Ontario’s prime agricultural farmland for what would be Canada’s largest open pit mine. This limestone extraction development project would require digging approximately 200 feet below the water table at the headwaters of major river systems, including the Grand, Pine, Nottawasaga, Saugeen, Noisy, Boyne, and Mad rivers.

Since 2006 when the Highlands Company first began purchasing farmland in Melancthon Township and the surrounding area there has been much trepidation from the local community. Since the multi-billion dollar hedge fund filed for the official application to build a mega-quarry under the Aggregate Resources Act in March of this year, fierce opposition has risen due to worries about a possible environmental catastrophe due to the pollution of the watersheds, as well as the loss of irreplaceable agricultural land.

Groups such as CAUSE (Citizen’s Alliance United for a Sustainable Environment), MC2 (Mulmur Mono Citizens Coalition), Waterkeeper, Mohawk Six Nations, and CORE (Conserve Our Rural Environment) have joined forces with NDACT (North Dufferin Agricultural and Community Taskforce) to stop the proposed quarry. The Agricultural Impact Assessment prepared by the Highland Company indicates that the vast majority of land, 95.8 per cent, proposed for the Melancthon quarry is Class 1 prime agricultural farmland. Only .05 per cent of Canada’s land is classified as Class 1.

The Aggregate Resources Act allows for an objections period, during which time local residents and concerned citizens can submit objections. Following the application for the project, the Ministry of Natural Resources received a total of 2,051 official objections in March and April of this year. The Highlands Company now has a two-year period in which to respond to all the objections raised. Due to the magnitude of responses, the Ministry of Natural Resources has stated that, “it will likely be some time before consideration will be given to the issuance or refusal of a licence.”

In September, due in large part to strong opposition and grassroots mobilization from NDACT, and associated environmental organizations, such as the Council of Canadians, Waterkeeper, CAUSE, CORE, ECOLOGOS, and members from Six Nations, Turtle Clan Mohawks, the Canadian government agreed to undertake an intensive Environmental Assessment, previously not required by legislation, of the proposed quarry. Ontario Minister of Environment, John Wilkinson stated, “Based on a review of those reports, and because of the unique nature of the Melancthon quarry proposal, I believe a full Environmental Assessment is necessary.”

Organizing against the quarry is, however, not slowing down. In October, Honeywood Ontario hosted 100 chefs from across Canada for an outdoor, pay-what-you can, public food event in support of the movement to stop the mega-quarry. Dubbed Foodstock, the chefs and community showed support to Ontario farmers by cooking lobster, risotto, squash, lasagna, apple pie, and other dishes that featured locally grown food. The event included big name chefs like Jamie Kennedy, Michael Stadtländer, Keith Froggett and Alexandra Feswick.

Organizers and the community were inspired by the level of support from people all over Canada as upwards of 20,000 attended the October 16 event. According to the organizers, Foodstock raised $145,000 towards the fight to preserve Melancthon as an agricultural community.

Bye, Bye, Wheat Board?

Small farmers raise concern as Conservatives cut board’s monopoly

Sheldon Birnie

Stephen Harper’s Conservative government has passed legislation to end the Canadian Wheat Board’s monopoly on exports and milling of prairie-grown wheat and barley.

“The Wheat Board was brought into place, basically, so that grain buyers wouldn’t take advantage of farmers,” explained Jo-Lene Gardiner of Manitoba Agriculture, Food, and Rural Initiatives, which is based out of Pilot Mound, Manitoba.

From its offices in Winnipeg, the Canadian Wheat Board (CWB) markets Canadian grain to world markets and for domestic consumption.

Opinions among grain farmers are divided on the issue. As it stands, grain farmers in western Canada can only sell wheat and barley to the CWB. The Wheat Board therefore decides which varieties of wheat and barley farmers can grow, buys grain from farmers and markets it to buyers domestically and around the world.

One benefit to farmers under the current system is that payment of grain is meted out over a year period, and the CWB attempts to provide farmers with the best price possible for their grain by paying them the average price of grain on the world market over the year.

“If when you sell your wheat, [the] price is five dollars a bushel, and by the time the end of the year came along the price was nine dollars a bushel, under the new system you’re stuck with five dollars, end of story,” said Jan McIntyre, a mixed cattle and grain farmer near Cartwright, Manitoba. “Under the Wheat Board, you would get the average price, which would be the difference between your five dollars and whatever the final average was.”

Currently, the CWB provides all grain farmers with the same price for their grain, “no matter if you have 100 bushels or 100,000,” said Gardiner. “If you have No. 1 wheat at 14 per cent protein, you would get the same price [per bushel] as the next guy. Everybody is treated equally under the system.”

“[The Wheat Board] takes a certain percentage [of wheat] right off the combine right to their elevator,” Derek Marvin told The Dominion. Marvin is a 31-year-old elementary school teacher in Winnipeg, but during the summer months leading up to harvest, he returns to his family’s farm in the rural municipality of Elton, Manitoba, to help his father run their 2,300-acre operation.

“Without it, farmers are going to have to bring it back home in their own storage bins on the farm, and so you’re going to have to buy new bins and find more storage and find more space for it all,” he said. “A grain bin holds 40,000 bushels, and that’ll cost you $100,000. That’s like buying a house!”

Opponents of the CWB’s monopoly argue that farmers ought to have the right to market their own grain, and decide which varieties to grow and when.

“An open market will increase the number of buyers bidding on our wheat and barley,” federal Agriculture Minister Gerry Ritz said told reporters in October, according to the Globe & Mail. “Unlike what some people may claim, the sky will not fall in an open market. Instead, the sky will be the limit.”

“I think it’s going to be a positive change,” said Barry Critcher, who has been farming grain for 28 years. Critcher farms 3,200 acres between Dawson Creek and Fort St. John, British Columbia, one of the province’s most productive grain growing regions. “I think it’s going to be positive to my farm, because I can sell my grain to who I want, when I want, and I can do the things I want to do on my farm without having to worry about letting somebody else do the marketing for me.”

The Prairie Provinces have been experiencing a rural demographic shift since at least the 1970s, which kicked into high gear since the 1980s. Rural populations are diminishing, small towns are dying, and economic control over food systems is held by an increasingly smaller number of players, with money flowing out of small communities and into corporate headquarters, such as those of agribusiness giants Vittera and Cargill, in urban centers.

How will the changes to the CWB affect this demographic and economic transition?

“I think it will perpetuate the problem,” said Marvin, whose family has been farming grain in the Elton area for three generations. “It’s already to the point where rarely can a small family farm exist on its own. It needs other income. When I think of all the farms around my community, all the farmers who were farming smaller acreages than us have dropped off. They’ve sold a few acres to us, a few to the Hutterites, a few to some other neighbors, because it’s just too tough to keep up.”

While it is impossible at this juncture to confidently predict what effects the changes to the Canadian Wheat Board will have on farmers and rural communities, there is no doubt that grain farmers and farming communities in western Canada will have to adapt to the new economic reality—and fast.

Most expect that the legislation will become law before the end of the year. if it does, as of August 1, 2012, the Canadian Wheat Board as we know it today will be gone.

This article was originally published by The Dominion.

Indigenous Sovereignty Week Celebrates Third Year

Peter Lewicki

Jimmy Dick has hopes that the future of Aboriginal rights and culture will rest with the children. The James Bay Cree drummer, who is part of the traditional drumming group Eagleheart, spoke warmly and emotionally about his childhood, how he dealt with racism, and how he is looking forward to the future with the hopes that next generations will change things for the better.

Dick was speaking as part of a group of about 50 Aboriginal activists, guests, elders and supporters who gathered at the Native Canadian Centre of Toronto on November 14 to kick off National Indigenous Sovereignty Week. Organized by the Defenders of the Land, the events of the third annual Indigenous Sovereignty Week were designed to help create a cross-Canada movement for Indigenous rights, self determination and justice through a series of talks, workshops, discussions and cultural events.

Hosted by artist Tannis Nielsen, the evening featured an open mike, speeches and prayers by community activists and a feast of traditional and contemporary food for attendees.

Award-winning poet Lee Maracle opened the ceremony with a prayer, touching on the need to respect the earth and all it provides. Roger Obonsawin also echoed the need to look to the younger generations to advance Aboriginal issues in Canada. Obonsawin is a member of the Abenaki First Nation, is a successful business owner and, for the past 35 years, has been actively promoting and defending treaty and Aboriginal rights for Canada’s Indigenous population.
Indigenous Sovereignty Week 2011, included numerous educational events on Indigenous issues called by Defenders of the Land, a network of First Nations in land struggle. Its purpose was to call on communities and supporters to celebrate, remember, and learn from community victories, recent and historic, while looking forward to discuss how best to organize in the future.
Defenders of the Land believe that the Harper government is attempting “the most dramatic overhaul to Indigenous Peoples’ standing in Canadian law since the Indian Act was first imposed.” According to the Defenders of the Land website, the federal government is attempting, “the further privatization and erosion of the Indian land base, the abolition of collective land rights, and the gradual assimilation of Indians through conversion of reserve communities into municipalities dependent on the provinces.”

Despite a hostile government, the organizers of Indigenous Sovereignty Week highlighted important victories and protests in 2011. Among these included communities such as Fort Chipewyan, who recently played a major role in halting the Keystone Pipeline development in the U.S.

Other actions included the Algonquins of Barriere Lake getting Cartier Resources to stop mining exploration on their territory and Grassy Narrows First Nation winning a significant court victory against clear-cutting and other activities on part of Treaty 3.

Meanwhile, in an historic referendum, Kitchenuhmaykoosib Inninuwug First Nation voted 96 per cent in favour of rejecting industrial development in the Big Trout Lake watershed, and to specify a protocol by which consent must be given for industrial development outside the watershed. This past year also saw the Tsilhqot’in nation stop a mining project that would have destroyed a life-giving lake on their territory.

Domestic Spying Operations Revealed

By Tyler Roach

Undercover police infiltrating community organizations and anti-globalization protests is not a new issue. Activists often claim they have experienced police spying and, more often then not, the undercover police are easy to spot. However, due to the open and inclusive nature of these community organizations there is little they can do when undercover police join.

During the Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP) protests in Montebello, Quebec in 2007, police infiltration became a hotly debated topic in Canada when a member of the crowd filmed a protestor attempting to incite violence. After an altercation with several peaceful protestors, this protester was filmed being arrested wearing his police issued boots. Later, the Quebec Provincial Police admitted to using undercover agents throughout their lead up to the SPP, claiming that such acts were legitimate tools needed for the police to uphold their, “mandate to keep order and security.”

While the state indulging in spying on its own people may not be new, the recently released reports by the Joint Intelligence Group (JIG), that consists of the RCMP, Provincial Police departments and multiple municipal police forces, shows that domestic spying practices continues to grow.

According to the reports, the intelligence gathering prior to the G8/G20 meetings in Toronto and Huntsville was one of the largest undertakings by the RCMP in its history. At its peak, the report shows that, between the G8/G20 and the Vancouver Olympics, the RCMP employed more than 500 people tasked with gathering information, infiltrating meeting and getting informants.

The Joint Intelligence Group report showcases an RCMP that is paranoid about the G8 and G20 being confronted by “criminal extremists motivated by a variety of radical ideologies.”  In particular, the report shows a particular concern for those citizens that may identify with or be sympathetic to “anarchism, anarcho-syndicalism, nihilism, socialism and/or communism.”

Groups that were watched included the migrant-justice group No One Is Illegal, Southern Ontario Anarchist Resistance and Greenpeace

The report notes that there is concern about the potential for violence, as the members of these groups are often, “at odds with the status quo and the current distribution of power in society” and, therefore, likely to actively engage against it.

In November, it was revealed that of the 17 community organizers charged over G8/G20 protests, only six will face sentencing. Using the work compiled in the JIG report as their primary evidence. None of the accused will ever make it to trial after four community organizers entered guilty pleas to charges of counseling mischief over $5,000, while another two others entered guilty pleas to counseling mischief over $5,000 and counseling to obstruct police. The remaining 11 saw the charges against them dropped.

The 17 community activists released a joint statement, following the announcement of the plea deal, stating that many of them did not know each other and only met following their arrests. They also argued, “One noteworthy outcome is that there are no conspiracy convictions emerging from this case, thus avoiding the creation of a dangerous legal precedent that would in effect criminalize routine tasks like facilitation.”

The statement further noted that, “the government made a political decision to spend millions of dollars to surveil and infiltrate anarchist, Indigenous solidarity, and migrant justice organizing over several years…this system targets many groups of people including racialized, impoverished and Indigenous communities, those with precarious immigration status, and those dealing with mental health and addiction. The kinds of violence that we have experienced, such as the pre-dawn raids, the strip-searches, the surveillance, and pre-sentence incarceration happen all the time.”

The JIG has defended their actions by emphasizing that public safety was “their number one concern.” However, critics argue that this seems at odds with the reality of what occurred during the G20 weekend.
Since that summit, the RCMP along with the other agencies that were involved in the G20 weekend have faced severe criticism from community organizations, media groups and bystanders who seemed to have been arbitrarily arrested. During the protests, the police arrested 1,118 people and charged 300, the largest mass arrest in Canadian history.

Next Page »