Finance Minister Dwight Duncan presented a so-so budget yesterday. It had its good points- the expansion at Milton District Hospital escaped the knife, and there are signs the Liberals really mean to clamp down on public sector unions. It gave a slight nod to both the Progressive Conservatives (P.C.)'s by asking seniors making over $100 thousand to pay for some drugs, and the N.D.P. by freezing hospital C.E.O. and M.P.P. salaries. It attempted to strike a happy medium by keeping the Green Energy rebate, but capping it at 3000 kWh.
Lots in there for the education system. The Liberals have moved to cut the so-called "lap year," where students take an extra semester or two to boost marks. They're continuing to implement their centre piece all-day Kindergarten program, and will offer 30% tuition grants for post-secondary students. And contrary to what the opposition says there is a Jobs& Prosperity fund; expected to save according to their numbers $250 million. How that will affect job creation remains to be seen.
The bad points have to start with getting tough with the public sector unions. The ultimatum that the Liberal government could legislate a wage freeze, coupled with noises about public sector pensions will anger unions. O.P.S.E.U and the teaching unions are all in various stages of contract negotiations and I can't see them willing to just take the freeze without a fight. And I'm betting it could be a messy fight as well. I have to give the Liberals points on this though to be willing to break with the union support. But I have to ask, is it too little, too late? The ship labelled "public sector wage freeze" set sail the moment they began selectively giving raises.
Did it do enough to create jobs? Honestly no. The province isn't expected to see the savings from the Job & Prosperity fund until 2014-2015. Meanwhile there is still unemployment; cancelling corporate tax cuts while glamorous, and something that will win points with the N.D.P. won't create jobs. It needs to be easier for businesses to hire; people need to be working it increases the tax base.
In my opinion this budget isn't worth fighting an election over. While the budget is lacking in parts, it isn't worth wasting 35 days, and $100 million over. However when you take the so-so budget, and combine it with the Ornge scandal, and public sector union back lash against the budget we may find ourselves voting sometime in early May.
Wednesday, March 28, 2012
Tuesday, March 27, 2012
Ontario Budget: It's in the NDP's hands now
To cause an election or not cause an election that is the question whether tis nobler to suffer the slings and arrows of outraged unions" (apologies to William Shakespeare for that one). That's essentially what it comes down to for Ontario's political parties after the provincial budget was read by Finance Minister Dwight Duncan.
Tim Hudak and the Progressive Conservatives have already said they will not support it, leaving it up to Andrea Horwath and the N.D.P to keep the McGuinty Government afloat. Andrea Horwath is taking a more measured approach, saying she wants to talk to Ontarians before making a final decision.
I think she's in a pretty sticky situation. There was in the budget a sternly worded ultimatum to the public sector workers from the McGuinty government to please take a pay freeze, or we'll legislate it. Both O.P.S.E.U (Ontario Public Sector Employees Union), and all teaching unions are in a contract year, and are at various stages of negotiating with their employer aka. the government. There has to be pressure from them to vote down the budget because of this, and that will be hard to ignore.
On the other hand as Andrea Horwath tours the province speaking to Ontarians she'll likely find the rest of us have little appetite for an election at this point. The economy is in a tough state of affairs, putting off fixing it for another 5 weeks for pretty much the same outcome is insanity itself really. Besides there is the money involved to consider as well: $100 million to be exact. And when offered a choice between a pay freeze and no job, most would probably take the pay freeze.
She'll probably find lots of anger over the Ornge scandal as well. Lately the provincial government has been using the line the money lost in the Ornge Ambulance debacle is only 3/4 of a percentage of the overall health care portion of the budget. In the context of a provincial budget it isn't much; but when you mention the disappearance of millions of dollars, and equipment sitting unused to regular Ontarians; some of whom can barely make ends meet then it's a lot of money, and a lot of waste.
Personally, I'd like to see this settled without another election. It's been less than six months since the last one, and I don't think it'll change much in terms of the standings. The timing aspect has to be part of the decision for the Lieutenant Governor as well. But he has another option; he could ask Andrea Horwath or Tim Hudak to meet the Legislature and try and form a government.
The Liberals have stated they would fight an election on their budget. I think that like the Governor General, the Lieutenant Governor has to obey a government so long as it is in office; so if a non-confidence vote ends up happening then expect a return to the polls. In the meantime the fate of the Ontario Budget is in the hands of the N.D.P. and Andrea Horwath.
Tim Hudak and the Progressive Conservatives have already said they will not support it, leaving it up to Andrea Horwath and the N.D.P to keep the McGuinty Government afloat. Andrea Horwath is taking a more measured approach, saying she wants to talk to Ontarians before making a final decision.
I think she's in a pretty sticky situation. There was in the budget a sternly worded ultimatum to the public sector workers from the McGuinty government to please take a pay freeze, or we'll legislate it. Both O.P.S.E.U (Ontario Public Sector Employees Union), and all teaching unions are in a contract year, and are at various stages of negotiating with their employer aka. the government. There has to be pressure from them to vote down the budget because of this, and that will be hard to ignore.
On the other hand as Andrea Horwath tours the province speaking to Ontarians she'll likely find the rest of us have little appetite for an election at this point. The economy is in a tough state of affairs, putting off fixing it for another 5 weeks for pretty much the same outcome is insanity itself really. Besides there is the money involved to consider as well: $100 million to be exact. And when offered a choice between a pay freeze and no job, most would probably take the pay freeze.
She'll probably find lots of anger over the Ornge scandal as well. Lately the provincial government has been using the line the money lost in the Ornge Ambulance debacle is only 3/4 of a percentage of the overall health care portion of the budget. In the context of a provincial budget it isn't much; but when you mention the disappearance of millions of dollars, and equipment sitting unused to regular Ontarians; some of whom can barely make ends meet then it's a lot of money, and a lot of waste.
Personally, I'd like to see this settled without another election. It's been less than six months since the last one, and I don't think it'll change much in terms of the standings. The timing aspect has to be part of the decision for the Lieutenant Governor as well. But he has another option; he could ask Andrea Horwath or Tim Hudak to meet the Legislature and try and form a government.
The Liberals have stated they would fight an election on their budget. I think that like the Governor General, the Lieutenant Governor has to obey a government so long as it is in office; so if a non-confidence vote ends up happening then expect a return to the polls. In the meantime the fate of the Ontario Budget is in the hands of the N.D.P. and Andrea Horwath.
Monday, March 26, 2012
My Stories To Watch
We've got quite a week coming up in the news. Here's some of the stories I'll be watching for.
1.Provincial Budget: It has to be at the top of the list. The Provincial Liberals will present their first budget as a minority government. It's also quite a hot story locally, as local councilors await word of Milton Hospital expansion's fate. As the budget is financial issue, and it is a minority parliament it will be a matter of confidence. But what will happen? Will McGuinty have enough votes to pass it? Or will the opposition decide to flex its muscle and send us to another election? Or perhaps a more interesting possibility... are we going to see history of the '90's repeat itself and Andrea Horwath come to the forefront (Bob Rae anyone?)? What kind of role will Ornge play in it all?All of the drama will certainly play itself out over the next few days.
1a) In advance of tomorrow's provincial budget Ward 3 Councilor Cindy Lunau is presenting a motion at tonight's council meeting asking the Province to re-confirm its commitment to Milton Hospital expansion. Its text, along with contact information for you to make your wishes known to can be seen here. Just scroll down, it's near the bottom. Council meeting starts at 7pm in Chambers, or you can watch it here.
2. The Federal Budget: We're all being told this will be a document with modest cuts. We know there will be changes to Old-Age Security, the pensions system. They've been speaking of cuts to military spending, and the C.B.C. There will be cuts in the civil service. Politically it's going to pass with a majority- no guessing games here. But something to watch will be Thomas Mulcair's performance as he faces his first test the newly minted N.D.P. leader.
3. Ontario Superior Court strikes down Prostitution law: The Ontario Superior Court has begun the process that will make prostitution legal. The decision could potentially open the door to legal common bawdy houses, and allowing sex trade to hire body guards for example. The federal government has one year to respond to the ruling, but both sides have indicated they want to take it to the Supreme Court of Canada, which could lengthen the process to two years.
These are just some of the stories crossing my radar. Thoughts? Agree or disagree by all means leave a comment below.
1.Provincial Budget: It has to be at the top of the list. The Provincial Liberals will present their first budget as a minority government. It's also quite a hot story locally, as local councilors await word of Milton Hospital expansion's fate. As the budget is financial issue, and it is a minority parliament it will be a matter of confidence. But what will happen? Will McGuinty have enough votes to pass it? Or will the opposition decide to flex its muscle and send us to another election? Or perhaps a more interesting possibility... are we going to see history of the '90's repeat itself and Andrea Horwath come to the forefront (Bob Rae anyone?)? What kind of role will Ornge play in it all?All of the drama will certainly play itself out over the next few days.
1a) In advance of tomorrow's provincial budget Ward 3 Councilor Cindy Lunau is presenting a motion at tonight's council meeting asking the Province to re-confirm its commitment to Milton Hospital expansion. Its text, along with contact information for you to make your wishes known to can be seen here. Just scroll down, it's near the bottom. Council meeting starts at 7pm in Chambers, or you can watch it here.
2. The Federal Budget: We're all being told this will be a document with modest cuts. We know there will be changes to Old-Age Security, the pensions system. They've been speaking of cuts to military spending, and the C.B.C. There will be cuts in the civil service. Politically it's going to pass with a majority- no guessing games here. But something to watch will be Thomas Mulcair's performance as he faces his first test the newly minted N.D.P. leader.
3. Ontario Superior Court strikes down Prostitution law: The Ontario Superior Court has begun the process that will make prostitution legal. The decision could potentially open the door to legal common bawdy houses, and allowing sex trade to hire body guards for example. The federal government has one year to respond to the ruling, but both sides have indicated they want to take it to the Supreme Court of Canada, which could lengthen the process to two years.
These are just some of the stories crossing my radar. Thoughts? Agree or disagree by all means leave a comment below.
And the New N.D.P. leader is... Thomas Mulcair
I'm a total a political junkie who never gets tired of talking all politics This past weekend's N.D.P. leadership convention was interesting viewing for me. And when I wasn't watching it on television, I was certainly following along on twitter.
It took four ballots, but as we all know by now the new N.D.P. leader is Thomas Mulcair from Quebec.It wasn't really much of a surprise; well before the convention he was touted as the front runner, and as near to a gauranteed winner as there was. What was a surprise to me anyway was that it actually took four ballots. I had my doubts whether Mulcair would win if it went beyond 2 ballots.
I find myself greeting the party's final decision with a mixture of skepticism, and disappointment. The N.D.P has been an ideals party that has made a general habit of going against the status quo. I would've thought just to be contrary, they'd pick an outspoken woman- Peggy Nash who I believe could really take Harper on, or the dynamic young person in Nikki Ashton. Or maybe they would choose to completely remake the image of an NDP'r by choosing Martin Singh. Or they could look to the future and the possibility of uniting with the Liberals by picking Nathan Cullen, or go the sentimental route and pick one of Layton's favourites Brian Topp as leader.
The very fact the N.D.P. had such a depth of choice speaks well to the diversity of their membership, and the abilities of the candidates. That Mulcair won against these five others was no small feat, and demonstrates his own abilities, but I'm skeptical he's the man for the job. The one phrase that springs to mind when I'm thinking of Thomas Mulcair is "wolf in sheep's clothing." He's got style, but he also comes across as being the guy that keeps you guessing, wondering what will he do next. That unpredictability will make him an interesting figure as he attempts to continue molding the N.D.P. into a serious contender.
Where does this leave the Liberals? I'm wondering that myself. Thomas Mulcair is fairly clear on the fact he doesn't want to unite with the party, for now that's okay. The thing is such an alliance may be necessary for either to find their way to government; so I wouldn't be so hasty to count out such a course of action. If I were Mulcair I would spend some time worrying about the Liberals, if only because they tend to sneak up on you when your back is turned. And because people are at their most dangerous when you count them out. Bob Rae has been stealing lots of attention while the N.D.P. has been running the leadership contest after all.
Good Luck Mr. Mulcair. You've a tough job ahead of you. I look forward to seeing what you'll make of the party.
It took four ballots, but as we all know by now the new N.D.P. leader is Thomas Mulcair from Quebec.It wasn't really much of a surprise; well before the convention he was touted as the front runner, and as near to a gauranteed winner as there was. What was a surprise to me anyway was that it actually took four ballots. I had my doubts whether Mulcair would win if it went beyond 2 ballots.
I find myself greeting the party's final decision with a mixture of skepticism, and disappointment. The N.D.P has been an ideals party that has made a general habit of going against the status quo. I would've thought just to be contrary, they'd pick an outspoken woman- Peggy Nash who I believe could really take Harper on, or the dynamic young person in Nikki Ashton. Or maybe they would choose to completely remake the image of an NDP'r by choosing Martin Singh. Or they could look to the future and the possibility of uniting with the Liberals by picking Nathan Cullen, or go the sentimental route and pick one of Layton's favourites Brian Topp as leader.
The very fact the N.D.P. had such a depth of choice speaks well to the diversity of their membership, and the abilities of the candidates. That Mulcair won against these five others was no small feat, and demonstrates his own abilities, but I'm skeptical he's the man for the job. The one phrase that springs to mind when I'm thinking of Thomas Mulcair is "wolf in sheep's clothing." He's got style, but he also comes across as being the guy that keeps you guessing, wondering what will he do next. That unpredictability will make him an interesting figure as he attempts to continue molding the N.D.P. into a serious contender.
Where does this leave the Liberals? I'm wondering that myself. Thomas Mulcair is fairly clear on the fact he doesn't want to unite with the party, for now that's okay. The thing is such an alliance may be necessary for either to find their way to government; so I wouldn't be so hasty to count out such a course of action. If I were Mulcair I would spend some time worrying about the Liberals, if only because they tend to sneak up on you when your back is turned. And because people are at their most dangerous when you count them out. Bob Rae has been stealing lots of attention while the N.D.P. has been running the leadership contest after all.
Good Luck Mr. Mulcair. You've a tough job ahead of you. I look forward to seeing what you'll make of the party.
Saturday, March 17, 2012
Media and the Rafferty Trial
There's been a lot said regarding the extensive media coverage of the Rafferty trial; specifically that it's too graphic. Even I cringe at some of the tweets coming from the two CBC Reporters who are inside the courtroom; the summary of Terri-Lynne McLintic's testimony about her actions in Tori Stafford's murder... the way she describes turning away while the accused allegedly committed sexual assault. That part made me hate twitter, and yet...
I understand why it's covered so extensively. Much of what McLintic has said was previously under a publication ban, and from that standpoint no matter how despicable and hateful the details it's news. We journalists wouldn't be doing our job if we didn't at least report on it. To their credit that's what the two CBC reporters are doing; summarizing the testimony in 140 character bursts. It's how I've been following the trial; I haven't been able to bring myself to read the print coverage.
There's a human need to understand, to try and figure out the puzzle; to ask how. How can someone ignore an innocent little girl's cries for help as Rafferty allegedly sexually assaulted her. How can someone knowingly abuse, and eventually kill another person as Mclintic now testifies she did? Where was the compassion as they kidnapped, then killed Tori Stafford?
In an effort to understand, reporters, and columnists are often driven to go deeper into the details; to analyze and speculate on those questions. In a trial like this it can get extremely uncomfortable for the viewer/reader/listener. If Journalists didn't at least try to provide some understanding; we wouldn't be doing our job. And we probably would be getting just as much flack for that too.
I understand why it's covered so extensively. Much of what McLintic has said was previously under a publication ban, and from that standpoint no matter how despicable and hateful the details it's news. We journalists wouldn't be doing our job if we didn't at least report on it. To their credit that's what the two CBC reporters are doing; summarizing the testimony in 140 character bursts. It's how I've been following the trial; I haven't been able to bring myself to read the print coverage.
There's a human need to understand, to try and figure out the puzzle; to ask how. How can someone ignore an innocent little girl's cries for help as Rafferty allegedly sexually assaulted her. How can someone knowingly abuse, and eventually kill another person as Mclintic now testifies she did? Where was the compassion as they kidnapped, then killed Tori Stafford?
In an effort to understand, reporters, and columnists are often driven to go deeper into the details; to analyze and speculate on those questions. In a trial like this it can get extremely uncomfortable for the viewer/reader/listener. If Journalists didn't at least try to provide some understanding; we wouldn't be doing our job. And we probably would be getting just as much flack for that too.
Wednesday, March 14, 2012
The Measured Response to Ontario's Finances
Over the last couple of days the McGuinty government has made a pair of announcements that will end up making them more money; an increase in license renewal fees, and the possibility of an additional casino. In principle I don't have a problem with either; licensing charges haven't gone up in 15 years- an argument could be made for a slight increase on that alone.. just not the full $8 that is forecast for this year. If delicately handled more casinos could work; however they come with their own set of problems in the form of gamboling addictions, etc. And as some point out the revenue generated by the casinos potentially takes money away from somewhere else.
I have a problem with the general concept these two represent. These two specific solutions make it look like the Province is simply making more money while trying to avoid a lot of the cuts. More money always helps especially if people have to spend it as in the case of license fees. It should probably be part of the solution it shouldn't be the only solution. If the province is going to return to prosperity then it has to be a mixture of making money and cuts. It should be an increase of say $1 to licensing fees while cutting funding to the LHIN's (or eliminating them altogether. It should be putting a Casino in while cutting or eliminating the Green Energy benefit.
The measured response has been pretty much ignored by the McGuinty government. As I cynically predicted in a previous entry they've ignored pretty much all of the Drummond Report. They've said no to charging parking fees at Go Transit lots, no to slowing the implementation of all-day kindergarten. Instead of closing a casino at Niagara Falls, they are closing slot machines at three sites (Windsor, Sarnia, and Fort Erie). The McGuinty government is also trying to negotiate a pay freeze for the elementary school teachers; if it happens it would be a significant sign they are willing to do what's necessary to balance the books.
We ontarians are generally reasonable folks who would meet the government halfway by paying slightly increased fees. The government has to meet us halfway and put together a measured response that includes cuts, as well as increases.
I have a problem with the general concept these two represent. These two specific solutions make it look like the Province is simply making more money while trying to avoid a lot of the cuts. More money always helps especially if people have to spend it as in the case of license fees. It should probably be part of the solution it shouldn't be the only solution. If the province is going to return to prosperity then it has to be a mixture of making money and cuts. It should be an increase of say $1 to licensing fees while cutting funding to the LHIN's (or eliminating them altogether. It should be putting a Casino in while cutting or eliminating the Green Energy benefit.
The measured response has been pretty much ignored by the McGuinty government. As I cynically predicted in a previous entry they've ignored pretty much all of the Drummond Report. They've said no to charging parking fees at Go Transit lots, no to slowing the implementation of all-day kindergarten. Instead of closing a casino at Niagara Falls, they are closing slot machines at three sites (Windsor, Sarnia, and Fort Erie). The McGuinty government is also trying to negotiate a pay freeze for the elementary school teachers; if it happens it would be a significant sign they are willing to do what's necessary to balance the books.
We ontarians are generally reasonable folks who would meet the government halfway by paying slightly increased fees. The government has to meet us halfway and put together a measured response that includes cuts, as well as increases.
Monday, March 5, 2012
Robo-Calls and Revisionism
Let's rewind the clock. It's late April, 2011- mere weeks left in the federal election campaign. The Liberals under Michael Ignatieff have spectacularly imploded, and Jack Layton is coming thisclose to actually getting the keys to 24 Sussex Drive. We all know how it ended; The Liberals lost their Official Opposition status to Layton and the NDP, sliding into a dismal third place finish.
Fast forward to now- approximately a year later. There are now allegations of fraud, and Elections Canada is now looking into 31 thousand robo-call complaints. This could turn criminal as the agency has called in the R.C.M.P to investigate. As the saying goes where there's smoke, there's fire. That's too many people to be a mere coincidence, too much allegedly illicit behavior to ignore. And it does make me angry to think someone somewhere would presume to try and take away people's votes... this is Canada for goodness sake one of the standard bearers for democracy.
Here's a question for the ages: If we knew about the robo-call scandal then would it have really changed the outcome that much? I'd say no. I would argue that there are too many other mitigating factors to tell if Robo-calls would've made much of a difference.
Voter turnout was so low partly because of the election timing. the 2011 federal election was the second of three elections in the space of a calendar year (October 2010- municipal elections, and October 2011 provincial elections to come). The electorate was tired out; everywhere we looked there was a politician promising us something if we voted for them.
And then you have the Liberals. Their campaign imploded almost from the first day when Michael Ignatieff fell right into the trap of mentioning the word "coalition." Not even former Prime Ministers Paul Martin, and Jean Chretien could help as they campaigned with the party close to election day. Ignatieff's personality was enough to put off even the most faithful Liberal voter, as that party's supporters ended up turning away and either voting Conservative, NDP or just staying home.
It was more than just Jack Layton's personality going for the N.D.P. It was a positive message that cut through the negativity being put forward by the other two parties. It was the party's determination to stick to their policies instead of playing in the mud with the others, as well as Canadians' thirst to believe that things could be different in Canadian politics.
We'll never know for certain whether the robo-call scandal affected the results, or whether it was one of these other factors. To try and apply it retroactively is madness. Our system doesn't have any mechanisms in it to allow for recall, or to force another election in the majority setting. The Governor General was appointed on the recommendation of the Prime Minister, and is bound by the constitution to obey a government so long as it sits in office. Besides honestly, another election won't solve anything- and would leave the country a few hundred million shorter. And I think something similar can be said of holding by-elections. But holding them would be a sign that allegations are being taken seriously.
If fraud was committed, someone will pay for it either through the justice system, or at the ballot box in the next election because Canadians will remember this. I think it's pointless to try and play revisionist history with this and say that robo-calls had a big impact on the results when there's so many other factors to consider.
Fast forward to now- approximately a year later. There are now allegations of fraud, and Elections Canada is now looking into 31 thousand robo-call complaints. This could turn criminal as the agency has called in the R.C.M.P to investigate. As the saying goes where there's smoke, there's fire. That's too many people to be a mere coincidence, too much allegedly illicit behavior to ignore. And it does make me angry to think someone somewhere would presume to try and take away people's votes... this is Canada for goodness sake one of the standard bearers for democracy.
Here's a question for the ages: If we knew about the robo-call scandal then would it have really changed the outcome that much? I'd say no. I would argue that there are too many other mitigating factors to tell if Robo-calls would've made much of a difference.
Voter turnout was so low partly because of the election timing. the 2011 federal election was the second of three elections in the space of a calendar year (October 2010- municipal elections, and October 2011 provincial elections to come). The electorate was tired out; everywhere we looked there was a politician promising us something if we voted for them.
And then you have the Liberals. Their campaign imploded almost from the first day when Michael Ignatieff fell right into the trap of mentioning the word "coalition." Not even former Prime Ministers Paul Martin, and Jean Chretien could help as they campaigned with the party close to election day. Ignatieff's personality was enough to put off even the most faithful Liberal voter, as that party's supporters ended up turning away and either voting Conservative, NDP or just staying home.
It was more than just Jack Layton's personality going for the N.D.P. It was a positive message that cut through the negativity being put forward by the other two parties. It was the party's determination to stick to their policies instead of playing in the mud with the others, as well as Canadians' thirst to believe that things could be different in Canadian politics.
We'll never know for certain whether the robo-call scandal affected the results, or whether it was one of these other factors. To try and apply it retroactively is madness. Our system doesn't have any mechanisms in it to allow for recall, or to force another election in the majority setting. The Governor General was appointed on the recommendation of the Prime Minister, and is bound by the constitution to obey a government so long as it sits in office. Besides honestly, another election won't solve anything- and would leave the country a few hundred million shorter. And I think something similar can be said of holding by-elections. But holding them would be a sign that allegations are being taken seriously.
If fraud was committed, someone will pay for it either through the justice system, or at the ballot box in the next election because Canadians will remember this. I think it's pointless to try and play revisionist history with this and say that robo-calls had a big impact on the results when there's so many other factors to consider.
Friday, March 2, 2012
Happy 30th Milton Toastmasters
On Tuesday Night the Milton Toastmasters celebrated their 30th anniversary with an open house for the public. The toastmasters for those who don't know is an organization that helps people with their public speaking, and presentation skills. People learn by making speeches before the club, and are given feedback by their fellow members. The Milton club is held at the Canadian Legion on Charles St, and current club president is Milton's Ward 8 Councilor Zeeshan Hamid.
The event featured three speakers. The first was my favourite; Susan Lamb-Robinson gave a speech entitled "How Big is your But." It was about how we all allow often let our fears get in the way of achieving our dreams. It struck a chord with me because it forced me to ask myself what I had to lose in taking a risk, and consider what obstacles I had standing in my own way. It was very thought provoking.
The other two were very brief. One was about how farming has changed over the years, and served as a good reminder to buy Canadian and support local farmers at the grocery store. The other I found quite funny was a timely rant on how complicated the Income Tax system is.
In surveys public speaking ranks up there as one of the top fears. It was inspiring to watch three diverse people speak with humour and eloquence about different topics.
The event featured three speakers. The first was my favourite; Susan Lamb-Robinson gave a speech entitled "How Big is your But." It was about how we all allow often let our fears get in the way of achieving our dreams. It struck a chord with me because it forced me to ask myself what I had to lose in taking a risk, and consider what obstacles I had standing in my own way. It was very thought provoking.
The other two were very brief. One was about how farming has changed over the years, and served as a good reminder to buy Canadian and support local farmers at the grocery store. The other I found quite funny was a timely rant on how complicated the Income Tax system is.
In surveys public speaking ranks up there as one of the top fears. It was inspiring to watch three diverse people speak with humour and eloquence about different topics.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)