Canada has moved back up again in the United Nations' Human Development Index survey. For six years running, we held number one, but in 2003 we fell to eighth place. This year, we have managed to regain some of that lost ground and move back up to fourth place. Sounds good, doesn't it? We can get back a little of former prime minister Chretien's braggadocio about our rating, He repeatedly called us "the best country in the world". Just before we do that, however, there are a couple of points to consider first.
Among the reasons for our loss of rank in the rating was the Candian government's treatment of the First Nation's' people. The federal government's policy regarding its First Nations' citizens has been condemned by the United Nations Human Rights Committee as a violation of internationally recognized human rights. As a group, they actually have a lower life expectancy than the rest of we Canadians do. How could that be right? How can that be explained? "After some 500 years of a relationship that has swung from partnership to domination, from mutual respect and co-operation to paternalism and attempted assimilation, Canada must now work out fair and lasting terms of coexistence with Aboriginal people." - Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples, 1996 When you read that quote, give extra emphasis to the words "domination" and "attempted assimilation" The history of the government's treatment of these people is a history of shame. But wait, you might say, if our rating has gone back up, then surely there must be progress being made in this area. Perhaps. Again, though, the rejoicing needs to be postponed for one more moment.
The HDI looks only at how conditions impact the citizenry of the country itself. Maybe it should also look at how that country's policies impact the citizenry of the Third World. Let's take a quick look at asbestos This is a natural fiber that people have been using for centuries. Pliny the Elder, of ancient Rome wrote about it, and also about it's dangers. He recommended that one should never buy a slave who had been working in an asbestos mine, since they "die young". He couldn't articulate the dangers, but we can. We have known about the dangers posed by this wunderkind of the fiber world for decades. We know, too, that the diseases caused by exposure can take long years, a decade or more, to begin showing their adverse affects on the health of anyone exposed to it. Follow the link on the word asbestos to read about the cover-up that has gone on, in Canada and other countries, so that profits could continue to be made from its use, at the cost of the health and lives of those who worked with it and, often, unknowingly used it. The government is so concerned about the health risk posed by asbestos that a billion dollar project is being started this summer to remove it completely from our Parliamnet buildings. This project, of course, would have been okayed by the members of Parliament. They know that to continue their exposure could very likely lead to their walking the halls of cancer wards in years to come. Heaven forbid! How very interesting then, that they should at the same time be part of our federal government's push to continue its export of asbestos. Seven of our ten trading partner purchasers of asbestos are third world conutires. The workers handling it there have no idea that they need to proceed with caution. Our government is failing to include suitable caveats with their export. There are reports of workers in India cutting into bags of the fiber, standing in the middle of a cloud of it. Obviously they don't know that simply breathing in will become an action that will come back to haunt them in the future. When they are struggling for every breath, and dying of the cancer that began back in that cloud, I wonder if they will realize it started as they opened the bags from Canada.
All of Canada's asbestos mines are in Quebec, a province with a history of petulant threats to seperate itself from the rest of the country. Could the federal gevernemnt be buying Quebec's continued participation with the health and welfare of its trade partners? I wonder, how much foreign aid are we giving to India, for instance? We of "the rich world" have been generous with our dollars, so much so, in fact, that by 1989 the Third World owed the rich countries $180 billion. The recipients find themselves unable to repay the loans. Perhaps Canada might consider cancelling the debt of any country, like India, to which we sell our asbestos. We could tell them, in our incredible generosity, that we will cancel that debt in recognition of the money they will have to hope they can find somewhere, to care for all their citizens who will be dying of cancer in a decade or so. Maybe, if we did such a thing, and made very sure word got to the United Nations about our magnanimity, they would be moved to bump us back up to first place. What do you think?
Among the reasons for our loss of rank in the rating was the Candian government's treatment of the First Nation's' people. The federal government's policy regarding its First Nations' citizens has been condemned by the United Nations Human Rights Committee as a violation of internationally recognized human rights. As a group, they actually have a lower life expectancy than the rest of we Canadians do. How could that be right? How can that be explained? "After some 500 years of a relationship that has swung from partnership to domination, from mutual respect and co-operation to paternalism and attempted assimilation, Canada must now work out fair and lasting terms of coexistence with Aboriginal people." - Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples, 1996 When you read that quote, give extra emphasis to the words "domination" and "attempted assimilation" The history of the government's treatment of these people is a history of shame. But wait, you might say, if our rating has gone back up, then surely there must be progress being made in this area. Perhaps. Again, though, the rejoicing needs to be postponed for one more moment.
The HDI looks only at how conditions impact the citizenry of the country itself. Maybe it should also look at how that country's policies impact the citizenry of the Third World. Let's take a quick look at asbestos This is a natural fiber that people have been using for centuries. Pliny the Elder, of ancient Rome wrote about it, and also about it's dangers. He recommended that one should never buy a slave who had been working in an asbestos mine, since they "die young". He couldn't articulate the dangers, but we can. We have known about the dangers posed by this wunderkind of the fiber world for decades. We know, too, that the diseases caused by exposure can take long years, a decade or more, to begin showing their adverse affects on the health of anyone exposed to it. Follow the link on the word asbestos to read about the cover-up that has gone on, in Canada and other countries, so that profits could continue to be made from its use, at the cost of the health and lives of those who worked with it and, often, unknowingly used it. The government is so concerned about the health risk posed by asbestos that a billion dollar project is being started this summer to remove it completely from our Parliamnet buildings. This project, of course, would have been okayed by the members of Parliament. They know that to continue their exposure could very likely lead to their walking the halls of cancer wards in years to come. Heaven forbid! How very interesting then, that they should at the same time be part of our federal government's push to continue its export of asbestos. Seven of our ten trading partner purchasers of asbestos are third world conutires. The workers handling it there have no idea that they need to proceed with caution. Our government is failing to include suitable caveats with their export. There are reports of workers in India cutting into bags of the fiber, standing in the middle of a cloud of it. Obviously they don't know that simply breathing in will become an action that will come back to haunt them in the future. When they are struggling for every breath, and dying of the cancer that began back in that cloud, I wonder if they will realize it started as they opened the bags from Canada.
All of Canada's asbestos mines are in Quebec, a province with a history of petulant threats to seperate itself from the rest of the country. Could the federal gevernemnt be buying Quebec's continued participation with the health and welfare of its trade partners? I wonder, how much foreign aid are we giving to India, for instance? We of "the rich world" have been generous with our dollars, so much so, in fact, that by 1989 the Third World owed the rich countries $180 billion. The recipients find themselves unable to repay the loans. Perhaps Canada might consider cancelling the debt of any country, like India, to which we sell our asbestos. We could tell them, in our incredible generosity, that we will cancel that debt in recognition of the money they will have to hope they can find somewhere, to care for all their citizens who will be dying of cancer in a decade or so. Maybe, if we did such a thing, and made very sure word got to the United Nations about our magnanimity, they would be moved to bump us back up to first place. What do you think?
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home