Poverty Reduction

There is considerably more attention being given to poverty reduction and elimination than was the case in the past by a broader constituency of the community. Poverty is now seen not just as a solution for those experiencing poverty but also as a means of promoting a strategy to make the whole community more prosperous and sustainable. The rhetoric has changed by including the word "social" when referring to the terms policy, sustainability and prosperity. Social sustainability, social prosperity and social policy have broadened the discussion and invites all sectors to become involved and part of the solution. It is vital that a dialogue take place between the private, public, and voluntary/non-profit sectors so that the connections can be made between social, economic and environmental interests.

In late 2007, all parties of the Nova Scotia Legislature passed Bill-94 which created a mechanism for a poverty reduction working group which made recommendations to the government in June 2008. The government responded with its own poverty reduction strategy in April 2009 titled: " Nova Scotia's Poverty Reduction Strategy: Preventing Poverty Promoting Prosperity". The strategy has four main goals to be achieved by 2020: To enable and reward work; improve supports for those in need; focus on our children; and collaborate and coordinate. A full-time coordinator was hired in October 2009 and a ministerial committee met to implement the strategy. In November the Deputy Minister of Community Services, the lead department for the strategy, appeared before the standing committee on community services to provide an up-date on the strategy and assured the committee that firm targets would be set by December 1st .

It would appear that the government is serious about tackling the problem of poverty. At least a mechanism has been created to help the process along. Funding also seems to be available to assist with the effort which is notable even as we are facing a sluggish economy. Two sources, bilateral agreements between the federal and provincial governments, will deliver significant funding over six years to bring marginalized groups and new entrants into the workforce.

Lets not fall into the trap of thinking that just providing a person with a job will eliminate poverty in our province. Many people with jobs are still living in poverty according to the common standards for measuring poverty. We need a broader focus when trying to eliminate or reduce poverty. Although a discussion on social policy with the broader community seems desirable, it remains to be seen if all the powerful self-interests can be addressed so that poverty is actually reduced or eliminated. We need to be optimistic and see this change in strategy as an opportunity. Lets ensure that poverty is addressed in a way that will be measurable and make life better for individuals and families and contribute to the prosperity and sustainability of the community.

It will be interesting to see what the "firm targets" are that have been promised by the formation of the ministerial committee to reduce and eventually eliminate poverty in Nova Scotia. Lets support the efforts of the committee and see what can be done.

The problem with agrofuels

Agrofuels, a form of biofuel, are produced from agricultural crops. They can replace fossil fuels to be used for energy to power cars and trucks as well as power to produce electricity. At one time agrofuels were considered the answer to the global energy shortage in the future. Already we have seen agriculture change from producing crops for food to large mono crops destined for conversion into fuel. This diversion from food crop production has had a noticeable effect on the security of the global food supply. Less food crops are transported to nations where food is in short supply and populations are starving.

Corporate agribusinesses are amassing large tracks of fertile land around the globe to construct mono crops of African palm oil, sugarcane, corn and soy. Huge masses of land are bought up or stolen from local farmers by industrial agribusiness companies to develop plantations. These huge mono plantations replace family agricultural which can grow a variety of sustainable crops like cotton, coffee, tobacco, potatoes, bananas and other fruit to sustain themselves and their community. Once lost to the agribusiness these communities are without a secure means to feed themselves. Furthermore, agribusiness is a threat to the environment as a result of deforestation and the use of chemicals used on the crops weakens local crops grown in the region due to the absorption of most of the groundwater.

What can we do? Much of the agribusiness is located in the global south where land is fertile and the local farmers are able to sustain themselves. Unfortunately, these farmers are no match to the large corporations that descend upon their county and force them out by offering cheap prices for their land or in extreme cases hiring "goons" to kick them off their land. The local farmers often do not have the protection of their governments who also profit form the agribusiness in their country.

Hunger and poverty can be reduced by giving priority to small scale farmers to produce food for local markets. Support our own local farmers and address the global food shortage by expressing your opinion to the Canadian government through your Member of Parliament and the Prime Minister. Ask you MP to at least support legislation that would sanction Canadian companies that engage in agriculture for the production of fuel.

Canada is planning to host the G8 conference in June 2010. Ask your government to pressure the G8 countries to increase their support for small scale sustainable agriculture in the global south.

The Blame Game

It appears that society is too quick to ascribe blame when things go wrong. Usually the people who submit to blaming others for problems look everywhere except themselves. If we only lived in a perfect world everything would be under our control. Unfortunately, this is not reality and there are many things out of the control of the authorities. Take for example the confusion about the vaccination program for the H1N1 virus. Was it realistic for the health authorities to expect that the whole country could be vaccinated all at once? In actual fact that was not the expectation and the authorities tried to make it clear that the program would need to take place over a period of time. Best estimates at the time for vaccine production were given and plans were created for what they thought would be an orderly program to get everyone vaccinated who wanted the vaccine. What they did not expect or had no control over was the uncertainty of supply, media hype and the need to frequently change instructions.

The media played an unwarranted role in reporting, sometimes in a very cynical manner, the confusion, changing instructions and short comings of the supply of the vaccine. For days and weeks the media would report the smallest glitch in a system that annually sees the normal flu take 4,000 lives each year, usually the lives of the elderly. As of October there have been 86 deaths attributed to H1N1 Canada wide. Why, with the relatively small number of deaths so far of H1N1, would the media continue to alarm the population? Granted, any death attributed to this flu strain is serious but it should not be used to create panic. This flu strain needs to be put in perspective so that the population can make an informed decision and react in a reasonable manner.

Another problem that the mass vaccination program is faced with is the change in supply of the vaccine. Many of the decisions regarding production and supply had to be made months in advance under very tight time frames. Apparently as time went on production switched to an unadjuvanted form of the vaccine leaving the adjuvanted vaccine in short supply and delaying the delivery of the vaccine to the non-vulnerable groups which is most of the population. Health authorities were concerned that groups like pregnant mothers and children between 6 months and 5 years might be at risk of complications pursuant to the latest research. Obviously health authorities wanted to be sure that these groups were not placed at unnecessary risk.

So why do the media and others engage in the blame game? Is it because it creates excitement and makes for high ratings and sells more newspapers? Lets not blame those who are entrusted to guard our health. Yes, they need to explain the situation as best they can but if you listen carefully you will notice that they usually qualify their statements and stipulate that as the situation changes new information will be passed on. Lets not forget that the health authorities are getting information continually from other parts of the world and from new research which is coming to their attention daily. Lets be more reasonable in our criticism, pay attention and follow their advice.