The media reports recently and especially during the Easter celebrations in the Catholic Church are a great cause for alarm for Catholics all over the world. The Catholic Church being a universal church has about one billion adherents to the faith. How this crisis is affecting them must be very demoralizing to Catholics and causing many to question their faith as well as their trust in the clergy.
From reports in the media it does not seem that the general Catholic population is speaking out about their thoughts and opinions in the crisis in their Church. There are always a few in the opinion pages that speak out on the subject of the day but in general we don't hear from the congregations of Catholics on this issue. In some parishes the clergy have just begun to speak at masses and raising the issue to encourage parishioners to discuss the matter in an objective way.
Discussions about religion and the church have always been emotional and it is usually difficult to have a discussion without feelings being hurt and polarizing positions staked out. This can occur between different religious faiths or within the same faith.
The media reports on problems in the church like they do for any other issue that has public relevance. Someone comes to them with a story that begins as a one-sided view of the events. The media researches the issue and gathers facts on the subject. The media attempts to find others with the same concerns about the issue. In an attempt to be balanced, the media will try to speak to a representative of the opposing view and include it in the reporting. If they are not able to interview the opposing side, they will report that they tried to contact the opposing side but the source was unavailable or refused to speak to the media.
With the current practice of 24-hour news media reporting on cable, the first impulse is not hold on to the story but to get the news item out as soon as possible. This results in a report even before a thorough preliminary investigation can be made. Often the media will include a brief interview with police or other official who may be in the middle of an investigation only to report that they cannot answer the question because the investigation is not complete. The media's audiences only have an allegation of one or more persons and an absence of completed verified facts on the matter.
There are times when the media attempts to perform the role of the courts by interviewing witnesses, gathering opinions from experts and then leaving the impression that guilt has been established (conviction by media). In some cases it may not be the intention of the media to be biased in their reporting but due to competition from other media outlets there is a rush to report on the matter. Unfortunately, this can leave an impression in the public that what the media is alluding to must be correct. Of course the breaking news may turn out to be verified later but, in other, cases the story turns out to be inaccurate and it is too late to prevent innocent lives from being affected.
The media's job is to report the news. But is it always news that the media is reporting? In the case in point, the allegations and the proven cases of child abuse by Catholic priests are prominent in the news media. However there have been studies done on the problem of child sexual abuse by non-Catholic clergy and among other professionals. For example, an authoritative work by a Penn State professor (1) , determined that between 0.2% and 1.7% of priests are pedophiles. The figure among the Protestant clergy ranges between 2 and 3 percent. The media seems to be satisfied with one-sided reporting without reporting on child sexual abuse generally. The impression left with the public is that child sexual abuse only occurs with priests in the Catholic Church. Although we know this not to be true there is the willingness to believe it in the absence of a full investigation of the prevalence of child sexual abuse in the general population.
So, is there a media bias when reporting child sexual abuse in the Catholic Church? A sample of recent headlines may indicate a bias: "Catholics facing a crisis of faith"; "Vatican hopes to shield Pope from lawsuit"; "1963 letter spoke of abuse"; Mancini mentions scandal in sermon"; Vatican: leave Pope alone"; Rome took 12 years to defrock U.S. priest"; "Jewish leaders say comparing allegations against Pope to anti-Semitism 'offensive'".
As each new allegation or statement is scrutinized day by day and repeated hundreds of times over the regular and 24 hour news networks, the public begins to accept the allegations and incomplete evidence to be the truth. This is an injustice to those who have been singled out or others who have been labeled guilty by association.
Measuring past deeds in the light of today's knowledge is not acceptable. The processes that we use today to govern behaviour are much more sophisticated than they were decades ago. In the 60's and 70's the sexual abuse of children was not reported widely and, when reported, not likely to be investigated. In those days we were just beginning to deal with physical abuse with some expertise. We had to recognize that there was a difference between physical abuse and discipline by a parent or teacher. For example, teachers were permitted by law to strap a student for misbehaviour. This was finally removed from provincial statutes and tighter controls were placed on parents who used excessive discipline that left injuries on the child's body. Protocols for sexual abuse were not fully developed and so institutions and investigative bodies were not prepared to handle these cases. Experts when consulted offered no clear direction. Institutions like the church, schools, orphanages and children's organizations like the Boy Scouts, Boys and Girls clubs were often left on their own to deal with complains and allegations that came to them. No doubt there was some thought of protecting the integrity of the institution especially when no protocols were available. Eventually, professionals such as psychologists and psychiatrists and social workers began to intensively study cases of sexual abuse and develop new protocols and legislation which we have available today.
Unfortunately the media applies the knowledge we have today with the handling of cases from the past and tries to hold people accountable using today's standards. This is unfair and does not recognize advances in our knowledge of the causes and the treatments of those who abuse nor the advances made in developing protocols for handling these cases. For example, there were no child abuse registers legislated by provinces and no protocols by organizations to refer to the registers when hiring staff to work with children. There was the widely held belief that if someone wanted to work with children that this was a well-intentioned and noble aspiration. As a result child abusers were able to continue their secret lives undetected.
The media is in the position of never to being wrong. First, they can report allegations of abuse sometimes with only the news that an event has occurred and nothing more. The next report will be another tidbit of information. This can go on for several days or weeks. Then when the event actually does happen such as charges laid or lawsuit initiated, it is reported again. By this time the abuser, who has also been incarcerated or, after a bail hearing, been released awaiting trial, looks guilty as a result of all the media coverage. At this point no trial in a court of law has even begun. The axiom "innocent until proven guilty" in a court of law does not apply in the public's mind. Then once the trial begins the news cycle begins anew with more speculation in the media and finally when a verdict is announced it is reported again. Sometimes this ends the speculation but other times speculation is made about launching an appeal. This leads to more speculation and media reporting unless the large time gaps in the legal process leads the media to abandon the case in favour of other stories where speculation can occur.
It is obvious that this process is good for the media that sells advertising during the newscasts. Also being the first to "break the story" will give them an advantage over their competitors, which will also bring in more revenue and some notoriety for being the media organization that "first broke the story". All during this type of reporting, the media can easily fall into the trap of biased reporting.
This is the context in which the reporting of the child sexual abuse in the Catholic Church has occurred. The Christian Church, with its belief in, love, compassion and redemption, holds everyone to be accountable for their own misconduct (sins). They must not only reveal and confess their misdeeds but also must do it with the realization that they have done harm to another person(s) and vow to make amends and to change their conduct in the future.
Forgiveness is another important foundation stone of the Christian faith system. Forgiveness requires that the one who has been harmed (sinned against) by the misconduct of another person must accept, understand, and offer hope to the perpetrator. This is a difficult part of the Christian faith to live out. It requires tremendous love, compassion and trust that the perpetrator genuinely wants to reform. For example, the case where a loved one has been murdered and how difficult it must be to forgive and offer assistance to the person responsible. There is something so noble in the person who is able to forgive in this situation. On the other hand it is also quite disturbing to hear a person state that they will never forgive and add that they will not be satisfied until the murderer has paid the ultimate price.
Our Canadian society and other societies have tried to live out the Christian faith by enacting laws that reflect this tenant of "love one another" and forgiveness. For example, Canadian law no longer requires the death penalty for persons convicted of first-degree murder. That is, the barbaric behaviour of putting a person to death for breaking the law is against the values of Canadian society. One can argue that the substitute penalty of life in prison is just as barbaric, still the convicted person has their life, such as it is. The convicted person has their basic needs met and a chance to reform over time. The assumption is that all persons are basically "good" and when given time and an opportunity can reform.
The Catholic Church is now in a crisis, however as with all crises this provides an opportunity to reform and to correct the wrongs that have been hidden and rendered unaccountable in the past. Institutional abuse has been revealed in the Catholic Church. Priests who have been convicted in a court of law have maintained secret lives and have abused children or collected pornographic images to satisfy their perversion. This misconduct of a few has tarnished the credibility and trust of all clergy who may now be viewed with suspicion by some. The Church will now need to reform itself to assure parishioners that it has changed and will develop measures and protocols to assist the institution to properly handle complains in the future. This must start at the local Church level and hopefully spread to the upper levels of the Church hierarchy. This process has started in the Archdiocese of Halifax. The Archbishop of Halifax, in his Easter message, announced his commitment to "re-founding our church", by making it more transparent and accountable. In addition to… personal, spiritual and moral resurrection there must be efforts to re-found our institutional practices in the hope of being more consistent with Christ's expectation for us all". To make this happen there must be …"comprehensive policies and clear processes to correspond to complex conditions of our day, in which the gospel is to be proposed". These processes will include how to deal with …"complaints, concerns and criticisms regarding the state of a parish, and the actions of a priest or any person serving the church". Any such matters would include careful investigation before any action is taken.
It obvious the Church is trying to respond and must respond to past failures. What is refreshing is the action taken by the local the Church even at this late date - a testimony of the desire and commitment by the clergy with the help of its parishioners to find a way to prevent misconduct going forward. A process for the removal of offenders must be the first priority but as well there must be a focus on those who have been harmed in the past, help offered and, if required, compensation offered.
Can the media allow itself the opportunity to report on these efforts as a positive outcome of a sad past of the institution of the Church or will the media dwell on criticism of the attempts being made by a well-meaning church and hinder the attempts being made to address the problem and set the church on a new course.
________________
1. Phillip Jenkins, Pedophiles and Priests: Anatomy of a Contemporary Crisis (1996) New York Oxford University Press, pp. 50 and 82
Sunday, April 4, 2010
Monday, February 22, 2010
The extreme political right v-s the social welfare agenda:
The interest and concern of those who seek a social agenda is the welfare of all individuals not just the ablest and more fortunate members of society. Those on the right resent interference with their right to be successful even if it is at the expense of individuals less fortunate than themselves. The right's ideology emphasizes the importance of being free to pursue their dreams using their own abilities and resists any controls, especially government controls, on their ability to prosper.
The trouble with this philosophy is that not everyone has the ability nor the opportunities that others have in life. If inclusion is not a prevailing value then we live in a society that values the survival of the fittest and polarizes individuals into rich and poor categories.
Some have promoted the maintenance of a middle class to feed the appetite of the rich and to provide for the poor. Its important for the rich and the poor to have a middle class. The middle class, if large enough can consume the products of the rich (thereby making them richer) and likewise the middle class can consume and pay taxes that will finance services to themselves as well as the poor.
How one looks at the world and their own place in it is a reflection of the values that they have been taught during childhood. If one is taught to value others and share resources then it is natural to be concerned about those who are less fortunate or victims of misfortune. When something goes wrong such as a natural disaster, lack of opportunity due to poverty, mental or physical disabilities, or inadequate parental guidance during childhood, there is a human need to respond.
The capitalist system plays against this attitude. The idea of markets is good but the current market system is damaging if left unchecked as witnessed during the current recession and near collapse of the global economic system. Greed takes over when one experiences the accumulation of excess and becomes driven to be more successful. We can only conclude that an unregulated market system makes everyone a victim of greed and is harmful to all of us. According to Raj Patel, author of The Value of Nothing: "The flaw at the heart of markets is essentially the idea that profit and corporations should govern the valuation of things and that everyone else should stand aside". Global economies still need a place to do business and markets can be a good thing but they need to be regulated.
A market economy, if left unregulated, is basically problematic. A system based on unending consumption is basically unsustainable because the planet's resources are finite. We are seeing this played out, for example, with the consumption of oil. Oil reserves, like coal reserves before them, are being depleted and very few new reserves are being discovered. We can foresee the day when oil and oil products will no longer be available. The global community is currently scrambling to find other sources of energy which will undoubtedly impact the standard of living of the developed world as well as the whole global community.
Can we ever include all people in a system that trumps greed over need? Can the global economies ever agree on a system that will propose solutions for the greater good at the expense of their own economies? A case in point is the failure of the developed world and emerging markets to curb their excesses to control carbon emissions. We have seen very little progress here and no expression of optimism for the future benefit of our children who will suffer if we do not curb our excesses. Our civilization may be known in the future as the one that caused future generations grief rather than creating the conditions for a better life for all.
There is no doubt that climate change due to carbon emissions (man-made or otherwise) has contributed to a global food crisis. One billion people live in poverty and are chronically hungry around the globe. According to Margaret Biggs, President of the Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA), "The ability of poor people to grow food to feed starving populations will be strongly challenged by climate change in the next five years".
Another case in point is the Canadian health care insurance system. Denis Falvey writing an opinion in the Halifax Chronicle Herald has made a clear distinction in describing our health care system as being both moral and financial. He states: " It is immoral in this day and age for a rich country to provide health care on the basis of a patient's financial means. It is also economically and socially backward and limiting for a country to provide health care on that basis".
We must abolish the idea that paying our fair share of taxes is something that we should try to avoid. Paying taxes provides the means for us all to enjoy the benefits of living in a society that values all individuals. It is a way of distributing wealth so that everyone can benefit in spite of their misfortune - the trade mark of a caring and inclusive society.
The trouble with this philosophy is that not everyone has the ability nor the opportunities that others have in life. If inclusion is not a prevailing value then we live in a society that values the survival of the fittest and polarizes individuals into rich and poor categories.
Some have promoted the maintenance of a middle class to feed the appetite of the rich and to provide for the poor. Its important for the rich and the poor to have a middle class. The middle class, if large enough can consume the products of the rich (thereby making them richer) and likewise the middle class can consume and pay taxes that will finance services to themselves as well as the poor.
How one looks at the world and their own place in it is a reflection of the values that they have been taught during childhood. If one is taught to value others and share resources then it is natural to be concerned about those who are less fortunate or victims of misfortune. When something goes wrong such as a natural disaster, lack of opportunity due to poverty, mental or physical disabilities, or inadequate parental guidance during childhood, there is a human need to respond.
The capitalist system plays against this attitude. The idea of markets is good but the current market system is damaging if left unchecked as witnessed during the current recession and near collapse of the global economic system. Greed takes over when one experiences the accumulation of excess and becomes driven to be more successful. We can only conclude that an unregulated market system makes everyone a victim of greed and is harmful to all of us. According to Raj Patel, author of The Value of Nothing: "The flaw at the heart of markets is essentially the idea that profit and corporations should govern the valuation of things and that everyone else should stand aside". Global economies still need a place to do business and markets can be a good thing but they need to be regulated.
A market economy, if left unregulated, is basically problematic. A system based on unending consumption is basically unsustainable because the planet's resources are finite. We are seeing this played out, for example, with the consumption of oil. Oil reserves, like coal reserves before them, are being depleted and very few new reserves are being discovered. We can foresee the day when oil and oil products will no longer be available. The global community is currently scrambling to find other sources of energy which will undoubtedly impact the standard of living of the developed world as well as the whole global community.
Can we ever include all people in a system that trumps greed over need? Can the global economies ever agree on a system that will propose solutions for the greater good at the expense of their own economies? A case in point is the failure of the developed world and emerging markets to curb their excesses to control carbon emissions. We have seen very little progress here and no expression of optimism for the future benefit of our children who will suffer if we do not curb our excesses. Our civilization may be known in the future as the one that caused future generations grief rather than creating the conditions for a better life for all.
There is no doubt that climate change due to carbon emissions (man-made or otherwise) has contributed to a global food crisis. One billion people live in poverty and are chronically hungry around the globe. According to Margaret Biggs, President of the Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA), "The ability of poor people to grow food to feed starving populations will be strongly challenged by climate change in the next five years".
Another case in point is the Canadian health care insurance system. Denis Falvey writing an opinion in the Halifax Chronicle Herald has made a clear distinction in describing our health care system as being both moral and financial. He states: " It is immoral in this day and age for a rich country to provide health care on the basis of a patient's financial means. It is also economically and socially backward and limiting for a country to provide health care on that basis".
We must abolish the idea that paying our fair share of taxes is something that we should try to avoid. Paying taxes provides the means for us all to enjoy the benefits of living in a society that values all individuals. It is a way of distributing wealth so that everyone can benefit in spite of their misfortune - the trade mark of a caring and inclusive society.
Monday, February 1, 2010
Haiti: Will we stay for the long haul?
Canadians have been generous with their donations to assist with Haiti's recovery following the devastating earthquake on January 12th.
Canada has its own recession yet the charity of people even when their own situations might be precarious is impressive. Of course the situation Canadians find themselves in is nothing compared to Haitians, yet those who give to others while facing hardships of their own can relate to the suffering of others even as they try to cope with less serious situations of their own. In our materialistic and egocentric society one would think that the prevailing opinion when asked for donations would be that: "I'm not able to give because I have enough problems of my own". Instead the value we have seen expressed is one of compassion and to give what one can. The massive outpouring of good will and charity in the aftermath of the earthquake in Haiti is exceptional. Canadians as individuals, organizations and governments have been very generous by raising over $80 million in directing their wealth to Haiti relief efforts. On January 14, the Canadian government announced the creation of the Haiti Earthquake Relief Fund which will match the donations dollar for dollar of registered Canadian charitable organizations in support of humanitarian and recovery efforts in response to the earthquake in Haiti. The Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA) will allocate these funds to Canadian and international humanitarian and development organizations. When added to the generosity of other nations, this humanitarian effort will go down in history as one of the largest ever made to one small country hit by a terrible disaster.
As we observe our response and the response of the international community, there is no doubt that the values of sharing and compassion are universal. The outpouring of concern trumps other news witnessed daily of armed conflict, lawlessness and cruelty which seems to attract constant media attention. In the Haiti situation, this outpouring of compassion is refreshing in a world where we read in the media everyday of inhuman acts and suffering of innocent people by a few who wish only to satisfy their own selfish desires. The hope is that our attention to Haiti and other disasters will not be short lived.
The fact is that Haiti is only the latest disaster to hit innocent people. There have been other notable disasters recently such as the tsunami in the Philippines, the flooding in Bangladesh, the Sichuan earthquake in China, wild fires in Australia, famine in Africa and armed conflict in various parts of the world forcing people to be dislocated, exposed to violence with little hope of ever being able to sustain themselves and their families.
However, Haiti is unique because the world needs to ask itself: "How did Haiti get in to this sad condition in the first place". The world has known about Haiti's situation for decades. It has become known as the "basket case" in the western hemisphere. That is not to say that it has been totally ignored. The disaster has brought to the world's attention the vast number of government and other relief organizations as well as the United Nations that have been working in Haiti for many years. Unfortunately, it appears as if the assistance was uncoordinated, each organization working independently in hospitals, orphanages, schools law enforcement and others. Often emergencies create opportunity and under Canada's leadership key ministers were brought together last week in Ottawa to rally the international community towards a strategic and coordinated effort to rebuild Haiti over the long term. Prime Minister Harper's call came during an address to delegates of the Ministerial Preparatory Conference on Haiti where Haiti's Prime Minister, Jean-Max Bellerive was in attendance. He stated: “It is Canada’s hope that this meeting will set the stage for broad international action on reconstruction that will mobilize the will and resources of all of Haiti’s partners”.
As the work of emergency aid continues, the international community is now mobilizing for the long term reconstruction of Haiti, a task that is considered to take at least a decade and more. The mobilization, if it is sustained, perhaps will be a positive outcome of the earthquake although it should not have taken such a traumatic event effecting masses of innocent people to look at the long term development of this country. Any redevelopment of Haiti needs to include Haitians and their government. They need support for governance and their institutions, maintenance of security, a program for preserving the land, so that the land is able to eventually support and sustain the Haitian people.
Lets hope that after the initial response to Haiti subsides, we will not forget their long term needs.
Canada has its own recession yet the charity of people even when their own situations might be precarious is impressive. Of course the situation Canadians find themselves in is nothing compared to Haitians, yet those who give to others while facing hardships of their own can relate to the suffering of others even as they try to cope with less serious situations of their own. In our materialistic and egocentric society one would think that the prevailing opinion when asked for donations would be that: "I'm not able to give because I have enough problems of my own". Instead the value we have seen expressed is one of compassion and to give what one can. The massive outpouring of good will and charity in the aftermath of the earthquake in Haiti is exceptional. Canadians as individuals, organizations and governments have been very generous by raising over $80 million in directing their wealth to Haiti relief efforts. On January 14, the Canadian government announced the creation of the Haiti Earthquake Relief Fund which will match the donations dollar for dollar of registered Canadian charitable organizations in support of humanitarian and recovery efforts in response to the earthquake in Haiti. The Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA) will allocate these funds to Canadian and international humanitarian and development organizations. When added to the generosity of other nations, this humanitarian effort will go down in history as one of the largest ever made to one small country hit by a terrible disaster.
As we observe our response and the response of the international community, there is no doubt that the values of sharing and compassion are universal. The outpouring of concern trumps other news witnessed daily of armed conflict, lawlessness and cruelty which seems to attract constant media attention. In the Haiti situation, this outpouring of compassion is refreshing in a world where we read in the media everyday of inhuman acts and suffering of innocent people by a few who wish only to satisfy their own selfish desires. The hope is that our attention to Haiti and other disasters will not be short lived.
The fact is that Haiti is only the latest disaster to hit innocent people. There have been other notable disasters recently such as the tsunami in the Philippines, the flooding in Bangladesh, the Sichuan earthquake in China, wild fires in Australia, famine in Africa and armed conflict in various parts of the world forcing people to be dislocated, exposed to violence with little hope of ever being able to sustain themselves and their families.
However, Haiti is unique because the world needs to ask itself: "How did Haiti get in to this sad condition in the first place". The world has known about Haiti's situation for decades. It has become known as the "basket case" in the western hemisphere. That is not to say that it has been totally ignored. The disaster has brought to the world's attention the vast number of government and other relief organizations as well as the United Nations that have been working in Haiti for many years. Unfortunately, it appears as if the assistance was uncoordinated, each organization working independently in hospitals, orphanages, schools law enforcement and others. Often emergencies create opportunity and under Canada's leadership key ministers were brought together last week in Ottawa to rally the international community towards a strategic and coordinated effort to rebuild Haiti over the long term. Prime Minister Harper's call came during an address to delegates of the Ministerial Preparatory Conference on Haiti where Haiti's Prime Minister, Jean-Max Bellerive was in attendance. He stated: “It is Canada’s hope that this meeting will set the stage for broad international action on reconstruction that will mobilize the will and resources of all of Haiti’s partners”.
As the work of emergency aid continues, the international community is now mobilizing for the long term reconstruction of Haiti, a task that is considered to take at least a decade and more. The mobilization, if it is sustained, perhaps will be a positive outcome of the earthquake although it should not have taken such a traumatic event effecting masses of innocent people to look at the long term development of this country. Any redevelopment of Haiti needs to include Haitians and their government. They need support for governance and their institutions, maintenance of security, a program for preserving the land, so that the land is able to eventually support and sustain the Haitian people.
Lets hope that after the initial response to Haiti subsides, we will not forget their long term needs.
Saturday, January 2, 2010
Political Ideology Interferes with International Aid Policy
The current government of Canada through the party in power in Ottawa has made a mockery of their recently imposed policy of total control over the ability of international aid programs to assist the world's most vulnerable people. Kairos, a group of prominent Canadian churches, was abruptly told by the conservative government of Prime Minister Stephen Harper that their funding had been cancelled for 2010. No meaningful explanation was given at the time except the vague comment that the organization no longer met the funding criteria of the Canadian International Development Agency's (CIDA) priorities of providing food security and helping youth.
The treatment of this organization by the government of Canada is not acceptable and the public needs to speak out persistently in support of Kairos and other organizations that bring relief to millions of people in undeveloped countries around the globe.
Accusations against Kairos appear to be greatly unjustified in the face of the limited explanation by government and the immediate defense offered by Kairos Executive Director, Mary Corkery. From the limited response from government it appears that the government was misguided in its claim to crack down on anti-Semitism, a charge that Immigration Minister, Jason Kenney, made at a conference in Jerusalem over a week ago when he stated that Kairos was promoting a boycott of Israeli corporations and products. This accusation was denied by Kairos.
If this is the rationale by the Canadian government for withdrawing funding to Kairos then it appears that any injustice is possible when false accusations are made to support a right wing agenda. What has happened is that an important financial aid program has been compromised and government actions have interfered with the delicate work being done by Kairos. Furthermore, this action has cast a shadow over other Canadian international development agencies carrying out similar work across the Globe.
We have a government in Canada that states that our own economic prosperity trumps international aid to the world's poorest. A government that anticipates that speaking out about injustices is a recipe for withdrawal of financial support. International aid organizations will now be concerned that by speaking out about injustices which they observe will result potentially in withdrawal of vital financial support. This is the old problem of social policy coming in conflict with the reality of injustice. The question is: Can an organization that receives funding from government openly criticize the funding source?
Some would argue that the funder has this right to choose since it does not want to be seen as supporting an injustice. It’s a delicate balance for the funder and especially for a government that supposedly represents the people and spends their tax dollars. However, the problem is who defines the injustice? This again depends on the ideology of the funding decision maker or their blatant miscalculation of events. In the case of Kairos it appears to be both.
The treatment of this organization by the government of Canada is not acceptable and the public needs to speak out persistently in support of Kairos and other organizations that bring relief to millions of people in undeveloped countries around the globe.
Accusations against Kairos appear to be greatly unjustified in the face of the limited explanation by government and the immediate defense offered by Kairos Executive Director, Mary Corkery. From the limited response from government it appears that the government was misguided in its claim to crack down on anti-Semitism, a charge that Immigration Minister, Jason Kenney, made at a conference in Jerusalem over a week ago when he stated that Kairos was promoting a boycott of Israeli corporations and products. This accusation was denied by Kairos.
If this is the rationale by the Canadian government for withdrawing funding to Kairos then it appears that any injustice is possible when false accusations are made to support a right wing agenda. What has happened is that an important financial aid program has been compromised and government actions have interfered with the delicate work being done by Kairos. Furthermore, this action has cast a shadow over other Canadian international development agencies carrying out similar work across the Globe.
We have a government in Canada that states that our own economic prosperity trumps international aid to the world's poorest. A government that anticipates that speaking out about injustices is a recipe for withdrawal of financial support. International aid organizations will now be concerned that by speaking out about injustices which they observe will result potentially in withdrawal of vital financial support. This is the old problem of social policy coming in conflict with the reality of injustice. The question is: Can an organization that receives funding from government openly criticize the funding source?
Some would argue that the funder has this right to choose since it does not want to be seen as supporting an injustice. It’s a delicate balance for the funder and especially for a government that supposedly represents the people and spends their tax dollars. However, the problem is who defines the injustice? This again depends on the ideology of the funding decision maker or their blatant miscalculation of events. In the case of Kairos it appears to be both.
Sunday, December 6, 2009
Poverty Reduction Strategies
Poverty reduction strategies being announced by certain governments is a welcomed development in the war on poverty in Canada. Strategies in the area of poverty reduction are necessary because the existence of poverty is a complex situation brought about by historical thinking about the "poor" and what they should be entitled to. Our society's ideas of how we should treat those who are not able to support themselves comes from a time when individuals had to fend for themselves or had to depend on the charitable works of religious groups and others.
Our society is changing. For some time it has been acceptable to think of poverty as caused by the way society is structured which makes it difficult if not impossible for some people to be self sustaining. Lack of opportunities for some in our society leaves them vulnerable to a life of poverty and no way of escaping. Governments forced by community-based organizations have accepted the fact that they have an important role to play in alleviating poverty.
Over the last few years governments have announced poverty reduction strategies that give the impression that a new approach is being thought out that will set targets for not only the reduction but the elimination of poverty. Such bold announcements hold out much promise and time will tell if such targets can reasonably be met. Nevertheless, the goals have been set and in all cases after much collaboration with community groups close to the poverty problem. This is obviously much better and holds out greater promise than simply throwing money at specific segments of the poverty experience and hoping that this will somehow solve the overall problem.
A new report just released by the Canadian Association of Social Workers on December 1, 2009 reviewed the poverty reduction strategies that have been developed to date by provincial governments titled: “Tuning into Poverty the Provincial Way”. It reviews the strategies developed by five provinces: Quebec; Newfoundland and Labrador; Nova Scotia; Ontario; and Manitoba. Not included in the CASW report was the New Brunswick poverty reduction strategy which was announced in November, too late for the report, and also the commitment of the Federal government by way of a motion in the House of Commons on November 24, 2009 to, " …develop an immediate plan to eliminate poverty in Canada for all". No target dates were established for the reduction or elimination of poverty.
Most of these strategies were reached after an extended collaboration with relevant stakeholders and community groups recognizing that a meaningful strategy could not be developed in isolation from those living and working directly with the problem. Some of the targeted goals for the reduction and elimination of poverty may be optimistic but, nevertheless, they represent a target that time will reveal if it was realistic or not.
The government of Quebec was the first province to set out a strategy in 2002 to have the least number of persons living in poverty among the industrialized nations within ten years. The government of Newfoundland and Labrador made a commitment in 2005 to fund specific strategies in the budgets of 2006, 2007, and 2008 but with no target date for elimination or reduction of poverty. The government of Ontario developed a strategy in 2007 with the goal of reducing poverty by 25% in five years and 50% in ten years. The governments of Manitoba, Nova Scotia, and New Brunswick developed their strategies in 2009. Manitoba set no targets or time lines for the reduction of poverty; Nova Scotia to "break the cycle of poverty" by 2020; and New Brunswick "aims to reduce income poverty in the province by 25 per cent and deep income poverty by 50 per cent by 2015."
These are notable commitments on the part of governments and time will show if they were effective in actually reducing poverty or not. Nevertheless, these commitments mean that social policy as it relates to poverty is becoming acceptable and seen not only as a way for governments to address the problem but also recognizes that social democracy may be the path to address a serious humanitarian problem that has plagued society for years. It also reveals the values that underlie a caring society and its search to care for those that find themselves trapped in a life with little opportunities available to them. Lets hope that other provinces and territories and the Federal government will join the group and make this a truly national commitment.
Our society is changing. For some time it has been acceptable to think of poverty as caused by the way society is structured which makes it difficult if not impossible for some people to be self sustaining. Lack of opportunities for some in our society leaves them vulnerable to a life of poverty and no way of escaping. Governments forced by community-based organizations have accepted the fact that they have an important role to play in alleviating poverty.
Over the last few years governments have announced poverty reduction strategies that give the impression that a new approach is being thought out that will set targets for not only the reduction but the elimination of poverty. Such bold announcements hold out much promise and time will tell if such targets can reasonably be met. Nevertheless, the goals have been set and in all cases after much collaboration with community groups close to the poverty problem. This is obviously much better and holds out greater promise than simply throwing money at specific segments of the poverty experience and hoping that this will somehow solve the overall problem.
A new report just released by the Canadian Association of Social Workers on December 1, 2009 reviewed the poverty reduction strategies that have been developed to date by provincial governments titled: “Tuning into Poverty the Provincial Way”. It reviews the strategies developed by five provinces: Quebec; Newfoundland and Labrador; Nova Scotia; Ontario; and Manitoba. Not included in the CASW report was the New Brunswick poverty reduction strategy which was announced in November, too late for the report, and also the commitment of the Federal government by way of a motion in the House of Commons on November 24, 2009 to, " …develop an immediate plan to eliminate poverty in Canada for all". No target dates were established for the reduction or elimination of poverty.
Most of these strategies were reached after an extended collaboration with relevant stakeholders and community groups recognizing that a meaningful strategy could not be developed in isolation from those living and working directly with the problem. Some of the targeted goals for the reduction and elimination of poverty may be optimistic but, nevertheless, they represent a target that time will reveal if it was realistic or not.
The government of Quebec was the first province to set out a strategy in 2002 to have the least number of persons living in poverty among the industrialized nations within ten years. The government of Newfoundland and Labrador made a commitment in 2005 to fund specific strategies in the budgets of 2006, 2007, and 2008 but with no target date for elimination or reduction of poverty. The government of Ontario developed a strategy in 2007 with the goal of reducing poverty by 25% in five years and 50% in ten years. The governments of Manitoba, Nova Scotia, and New Brunswick developed their strategies in 2009. Manitoba set no targets or time lines for the reduction of poverty; Nova Scotia to "break the cycle of poverty" by 2020; and New Brunswick "aims to reduce income poverty in the province by 25 per cent and deep income poverty by 50 per cent by 2015."
These are notable commitments on the part of governments and time will show if they were effective in actually reducing poverty or not. Nevertheless, these commitments mean that social policy as it relates to poverty is becoming acceptable and seen not only as a way for governments to address the problem but also recognizes that social democracy may be the path to address a serious humanitarian problem that has plagued society for years. It also reveals the values that underlie a caring society and its search to care for those that find themselves trapped in a life with little opportunities available to them. Lets hope that other provinces and territories and the Federal government will join the group and make this a truly national commitment.
Saturday, November 28, 2009
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.
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.
Sunday, November 15, 2009
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.
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.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
.jpg)