Sino-Forest Corp. [TRE.TO]has been a high-flying stock on the Toronto Stock Exchange. But investors who have been around the TSX for a while probably aren't surprised by the accounting scandal surrounding the widely held company.
Al Rosen, a prominent forensic accountant in Toronto, certainly isn't.He believes new international accounting rules known as the International Financial Reporting Standards, which have been adopted in Canada, probably mean there will be more balance sheets blowing up on Canadian investors — not less.
This isn't to say that Sino-Forest Corp. is guilty of anything, says Rosen. It's simply too early to say that.
Here's what we think we know so far:
A recent report from analyst Carson Block of the Muddy Waters hedge fund alleged that Sino-Forest had overstated the value of its assets, including the ownership of vast tracts of forest, triggering a huge price drop in the shares in late May and early June.
And shareholders were hurt again earlier this week when American hedge fund manager Paulson & Co. dumped 34.7 million Sino-Forest shares, representing a 14-per-cent stake in the company.
While Sino-Forest may yet be vindicated, the Muddy Waters complaint had a familiar ring to many Canada investors, especially people who once owned companies like Nortel or Garth Drabinsky's Livent.
Essentially, Muddy Waters alleges Sino had incorrectly stated the value of some of its assets and may have dealt improperly with companies with which it had relationships. As a result this may have made the company look far more valuable than it was.
Companies that tend to inflate their assets and profits often utilize weak "revenue recognition rules," says Rosen. Such asset inflation is commonplace in Canada and may or may not have occurred in Sino-Forest's case.
Revenue inflation was in large part the case with Nortel, where the value of some of accounts receivable assets on its balance sheet were inappropriately interpreted as being cash equivalents (but some were never collected in cash). The trouble is, those are the same assets and revenues that equity analysts use to value a company.
And unfortunately for investors, who believed what the analysts were telling them, their shares usually become worthless when the true value is revealed.
Rosen says under the new IFRS rules (applicable in 2011) it will become even easier for executives to create phantom assets values and phoney profits.
"It's a major, major step backwards in Canada," says Rosen. "It's a wide open field for crooks because you don't have to report as much relevant information to shareholders."
And some of the issues raised by Muddy Waters clearly involve questions of ownership and the value of assets.
That doesn't come as news to Rosen, who points out that under IFRS rules management has tremendous freedom to set the of value assets. For example, a property company could value a building at its original purchase price, revalue it each quarter or establish a one-time value increase.
Three companies in Canada could have three values for the same building. But investors have no way of knowing what the accurate value really is. "You can put any damn figure you want on a balance sheet," says Rosen. "And they are all in accordance with the IFRS rules. It's just sheer stupidity."
It's interesting to note the U.S., where Wall Street triggered the international financial crisis when markets were blindsided by worthless derivatives, doesn't want anything to do with the new IFRS rules that have been embraced by Canada.
"The U.S. has looked at the IFRS rules," says Rosen, "and they call it a race to the bottom, and they look at Canadians and think we're the stupidest people on earth."
Still, in Canada, major accounting firms have supported IFRS - which was developed by the European Union. But Rosen says this is because it lowers their liability when company audits turn out to be profoundly wrong.
"It pushes the responsibility onto the board of directors," said Rosen. "And the federal and provincial regulators go along with it."
One of the problems investors now face under IFRS is a lack of clarity. In the past, says Rosen, he was able to go to court and explain to a judge that a clear accounting rule had been violated and could not be misinterpreted.
But under the IFRS rules, Rosen says regulations are much more open to interpretation and therefore abuse.
Oddly, particularly in light of the Wall Street-inspired financial crisis, Canada has always trailed the U.S. when it comes to forcing companies to be truthful in their audits.
"We've always lagged the U.S. in accounting standards," says Rosen. "And it's a double-barrelled lag. It's a lag in accounting, in what you have to do, and it's a lag in auditing in what you have to check. Essentially, you audit in Canada by asking management to sign a letter saying that the crooked information they put on the financial statement is OK."
And, unfortunately for Canadian investors, they may increasingly find they are left with very little when someone like the Muddy Waters hedge fund comes looking for the truth.
Picture
Subscribe To
Posts
All Comments
Popular Posts
-
The God Business: Church -Tax Exemption
-
Many world cities could face financial collapse in 2011
-
USA Oregon -doctors legally prescribe a life-ending drug
-
Design with No Designer?
-
How has information control evolved under Harper?
-
10 Best IT Practices for Smartphone Security
-
Nova Scotia Labour Standards
-
A case study on first nations poverty
-
Canada is the world’s most expensive country ..
-
Will we ever learn?
Lockout drives thousands to switch to online billing
Canada Post lockout drives thousands to switch to online billing
How to improve the bottom line..force a strike then get Harper to make it illegal
Canada Post employees can expect a lighter load once they’ve dealt with the backlog of mail they’re facing this week.
Thousands of frustrated consumers across the country have made the switch to receiving their banking and cable and utility bills online, in response to the labour dispute between the Crown corporation and its 48,000 unionized employees.
Thanks to the Senate for their sober thoughts on Canada Post
Mail delivery to resume Tuesday, Canada Post says E-services are a good substitute for the mailman By making it inconvenient for people to pay their bills, the battle has accelerated the shift away from paper statements – a change that is posing a major challenge to Canada Post as it finds its place in an increasingly digital world.
Mail is expected to be on the move again on Tuesday, nearly a month after members of the Canadian Union of Postal Workers began a series of rolling strikes in large part to protest wage rates. This week, both union and management, which locked out workers on June 14, have said they will comply with the federal government’s back-to-work legislation after a weeks of divisive – and at times bitter – debate on Parliament Hill.
Post offices were scheduled to start delivery Tuesday morning after employees were ordered back to work on Sunday. But Canada Post has already suffered a great deal of damage – as the dispute dragged on, the corporation said the labour action was costing tens of millions of dollars in lost business. But will be regained with lower labour and running costs.
ING Direct, a bank that conducts its business by Internet or phone, had 350,000 customers switch to online banking in the past two weeks. Almost half of its 1.8 million Canadian customers now receive their banking statements exclusively online.
“The postal strike created a small catalyst at a time when it’s already easy to make a change to online,” said Peter Aceto, chief executive officer of ING Direct Canada. “Canada Post has gone from the thing we relied on most to communicate a few decades ago to becoming a smaller part of our lives.”
Canada Post will lose at least $2,352,000 a year in revenue from ING Direct on stamps alone, assuming the company sends each of those 350,000 people one letter a month at the commercial price of $0.56 a stamp.
It isn’t just banks that will save from the switch to online bills and statements.
At Shaw Communications Inc., a telecommunications company, about 70,000 people signed up for online billing in June.
“That’s probably 10 times more than we would normally see,” said Peter Bissonnette, Shaw’s president.
“Clearly the labour disruption has driven that behaviour,” he said. “We’re very pleased that customers are finding other ways to do their billing.”
Enmax Corporation, a Calgary-based utility, had 5,000 customers enroll in its online billing system – a “very dramatic increase,” spokesman Ian Todd wrote in an e-mail.
Rogers Communications and TD Canada Trust also saw increases in customers choosing online bills and banking, but did not have exact numbers.
Jon Hamilton, a spokesman for Canada Post, says the corporation tried to convince the union that even the threat of a strike could have an impact.
“We went out talking to our employees as much as a year and a half ago, saying, ‘We need to understand that there are options available to our customers these days,’ ” he said. “The exclusive privilege we enjoy on letter mail is over – we have a huge competitor and it’s called the Internet.”
Canada Post has much to figure out to remain relevant, but charities, seniors, people in rural areas and small-business owners still rely on its extensive network, Mr. Hamilton said.
“The strike may have hastened the process for some people to switch, but the long-run trend was there anyway,” said Richard Chaykowski, a professor of industrial relations at Queen’s University.
Published on M
How to improve the bottom line..force a strike then get Harper to make it illegal
Canada Post employees can expect a lighter load once they’ve dealt with the backlog of mail they’re facing this week.
Thousands of frustrated consumers across the country have made the switch to receiving their banking and cable and utility bills online, in response to the labour dispute between the Crown corporation and its 48,000 unionized employees.
Thanks to the Senate for their sober thoughts on Canada Post
Mail delivery to resume Tuesday, Canada Post says E-services are a good substitute for the mailman By making it inconvenient for people to pay their bills, the battle has accelerated the shift away from paper statements – a change that is posing a major challenge to Canada Post as it finds its place in an increasingly digital world.
Mail is expected to be on the move again on Tuesday, nearly a month after members of the Canadian Union of Postal Workers began a series of rolling strikes in large part to protest wage rates. This week, both union and management, which locked out workers on June 14, have said they will comply with the federal government’s back-to-work legislation after a weeks of divisive – and at times bitter – debate on Parliament Hill.
Post offices were scheduled to start delivery Tuesday morning after employees were ordered back to work on Sunday. But Canada Post has already suffered a great deal of damage – as the dispute dragged on, the corporation said the labour action was costing tens of millions of dollars in lost business. But will be regained with lower labour and running costs.
ING Direct, a bank that conducts its business by Internet or phone, had 350,000 customers switch to online banking in the past two weeks. Almost half of its 1.8 million Canadian customers now receive their banking statements exclusively online.
“The postal strike created a small catalyst at a time when it’s already easy to make a change to online,” said Peter Aceto, chief executive officer of ING Direct Canada. “Canada Post has gone from the thing we relied on most to communicate a few decades ago to becoming a smaller part of our lives.”
Canada Post will lose at least $2,352,000 a year in revenue from ING Direct on stamps alone, assuming the company sends each of those 350,000 people one letter a month at the commercial price of $0.56 a stamp.
It isn’t just banks that will save from the switch to online bills and statements.
At Shaw Communications Inc., a telecommunications company, about 70,000 people signed up for online billing in June.
“That’s probably 10 times more than we would normally see,” said Peter Bissonnette, Shaw’s president.
“Clearly the labour disruption has driven that behaviour,” he said. “We’re very pleased that customers are finding other ways to do their billing.”
Enmax Corporation, a Calgary-based utility, had 5,000 customers enroll in its online billing system – a “very dramatic increase,” spokesman Ian Todd wrote in an e-mail.
Rogers Communications and TD Canada Trust also saw increases in customers choosing online bills and banking, but did not have exact numbers.
Jon Hamilton, a spokesman for Canada Post, says the corporation tried to convince the union that even the threat of a strike could have an impact.
“We went out talking to our employees as much as a year and a half ago, saying, ‘We need to understand that there are options available to our customers these days,’ ” he said. “The exclusive privilege we enjoy on letter mail is over – we have a huge competitor and it’s called the Internet.”
Canada Post has much to figure out to remain relevant, but charities, seniors, people in rural areas and small-business owners still rely on its extensive network, Mr. Hamilton said.
“The strike may have hastened the process for some people to switch, but the long-run trend was there anyway,” said Richard Chaykowski, a professor of industrial relations at Queen’s University.
Published on M
Canada slips further in innovation rankings
Canada is now a mid-level player in the global innovation race, passed by rising powers China and South Korea in some categories and falling further behind long-time rivals such as the United States, Germany, Norway and Sweden.
In a report being released Tuesday in Ottawa, the Science, Technology and Innovation Council says Canada’s innovation performance has slumped on most key measures in the two years since its last report card.
Why doesn't Canada have more top companies?
Factors that hinder Canada’s tech, digital sectors have nothing to do with UBB
Where Canada shines: water tech
The conclusions are familiar to those who have closely followed the innovation debate. A flood of studies has shown that Canada has talent and resources in spades, but isn’t leveraging them effectively to consistently produce the kind of innovation necessary to make the country prosper over the long haul.
What’s particularly frustrating to experts is that Canada isn’t making any progress, in spite of knowing for some time where the country falls short.
Indeed, Canada ranked worse or stagnated in 18 of 24 benchmarks tracked by the council since its 2008 report, according to the 76-page document, a copy of which was obtained by The Globe and Mail.
“Current best efforts are not getting us to where we want to be,” concludes the council, which is chaired by University of Ottawa chemist Howard Alper.
Among other things, the country is spending less per capita on research and development, business R&D is down, venture capital relative to GDP is down, government spending on R&D has fallen and the ranking of Canadians in high-school test scores is lower.
And while Canada spends a lot of money on R&D through tax credits, it spends less than its peers in direct contributions to innovative companies, according to the report.
A recentinvestigation found that a significant chunk of the nearly $5-billion that Ottawa and the provinces give to companies in refundable R&D tax credits goes to dubious research and unscrupulous consultants. The result is that Canadian taxpayers are spending billions of dollars on a program that too often delivers little or no new R&D.
The STIC report also found that from 2000 to 2007, Canadian companies spent 75 per cent of what their U.S. counterparts did on machinery and equipment, per worker. And they invested in information and communications technology at half the pace of U.S. companies.
The report pointed out that the strong dollar provides a window of opportunity to invest in imported technology at lower cost.
Another major area of concern is labour productivity, which has been growing at less than 1 per cent for the past decade. Among advanced economies, that puts Canada 23rd out of 33 countries in productivity, according to the Swiss-based International Institute For Management Development.
On the positive side, Canada’s performance is improving in areas such as R&D spending by the provinces, funding of research through the tax credits and the percentage of the population with postgraduate education.
“Data show that some Canadian industries are global leaders,” according to the report, titled State of the Nation 2010. “We are also fortunate to have a strong talent pool that could deliver on high ambitions. The challenge is to deploy talent well, invest in advanced technology, integrate innovation into corporate and country strategies and leverage our efforts to deliver prosperity for all Canadians.”
Among the key observations in the report is that the country needs to do a better job of fostering clusters around its leading companies. These tend to be few and far between in Canada, and the recent struggles of Research In Motion Ltd. demonstrate that the country’s depth of innovation leaders is pretty thin.
“Support for clusters is one way to build critical mass in both short-term and long-term research areas of joint interest to companies and research organizations,” according to the report. “Such collaborations also improve companies’ ability to recruit Canada’s highly qualified graduates.”
Another federal advisory panel, headed by Open Text chairman Thomas Jenkins, is currently reviewing what Canada spends on R&D, with a focus on the controversial Scientific Research and Experimental Development tax credit. His report is due out before the end of the year.
In a report being released Tuesday in Ottawa, the Science, Technology and Innovation Council says Canada’s innovation performance has slumped on most key measures in the two years since its last report card.
Why doesn't Canada have more top companies?
Factors that hinder Canada’s tech, digital sectors have nothing to do with UBB
Where Canada shines: water tech
The conclusions are familiar to those who have closely followed the innovation debate. A flood of studies has shown that Canada has talent and resources in spades, but isn’t leveraging them effectively to consistently produce the kind of innovation necessary to make the country prosper over the long haul.
What’s particularly frustrating to experts is that Canada isn’t making any progress, in spite of knowing for some time where the country falls short.
Indeed, Canada ranked worse or stagnated in 18 of 24 benchmarks tracked by the council since its 2008 report, according to the 76-page document, a copy of which was obtained by The Globe and Mail.
“Current best efforts are not getting us to where we want to be,” concludes the council, which is chaired by University of Ottawa chemist Howard Alper.
Among other things, the country is spending less per capita on research and development, business R&D is down, venture capital relative to GDP is down, government spending on R&D has fallen and the ranking of Canadians in high-school test scores is lower.
And while Canada spends a lot of money on R&D through tax credits, it spends less than its peers in direct contributions to innovative companies, according to the report.
A recentinvestigation found that a significant chunk of the nearly $5-billion that Ottawa and the provinces give to companies in refundable R&D tax credits goes to dubious research and unscrupulous consultants. The result is that Canadian taxpayers are spending billions of dollars on a program that too often delivers little or no new R&D.
The STIC report also found that from 2000 to 2007, Canadian companies spent 75 per cent of what their U.S. counterparts did on machinery and equipment, per worker. And they invested in information and communications technology at half the pace of U.S. companies.
The report pointed out that the strong dollar provides a window of opportunity to invest in imported technology at lower cost.
Another major area of concern is labour productivity, which has been growing at less than 1 per cent for the past decade. Among advanced economies, that puts Canada 23rd out of 33 countries in productivity, according to the Swiss-based International Institute For Management Development.
On the positive side, Canada’s performance is improving in areas such as R&D spending by the provinces, funding of research through the tax credits and the percentage of the population with postgraduate education.
“Data show that some Canadian industries are global leaders,” according to the report, titled State of the Nation 2010. “We are also fortunate to have a strong talent pool that could deliver on high ambitions. The challenge is to deploy talent well, invest in advanced technology, integrate innovation into corporate and country strategies and leverage our efforts to deliver prosperity for all Canadians.”
Among the key observations in the report is that the country needs to do a better job of fostering clusters around its leading companies. These tend to be few and far between in Canada, and the recent struggles of Research In Motion Ltd. demonstrate that the country’s depth of innovation leaders is pretty thin.
“Support for clusters is one way to build critical mass in both short-term and long-term research areas of joint interest to companies and research organizations,” according to the report. “Such collaborations also improve companies’ ability to recruit Canada’s highly qualified graduates.”
Another federal advisory panel, headed by Open Text chairman Thomas Jenkins, is currently reviewing what Canada spends on R&D, with a focus on the controversial Scientific Research and Experimental Development tax credit. His report is due out before the end of the year.
Canada’s neglected (immigrant) seniors
We should help older immigrants learn English or French as soon as possible so they don't feel so isolated.
June is Seniors’ Month, a time to honour older Canadians – their knowledge, experience and the contributions they make every day to our country. But there’s one group of neglected seniors: those who arrive in Canada after the age 50. These immigrants are often family members sponsored to join children and grandchildren who’ve already settled in Canada. They too are important members of our society.
A research project led by Kenise Murphy Kilbride of Ryerson University found that, during the past 15 years, nearly two-thirds of immigrants 50 and over reported having no knowledge of either official language at their time of entry. Immigrants 65 and older, and female immigrants, are even less likely to speak English or French.
Without knowledge of English or French, older immigrants are at a disadvantage in the labour market. Moreover, they can’t expect any income support from Canada’s social programs. The Old Age Security payments that are made to almost everyone starting at 65 require 10 years of Canadian residency.
Those who meet the 10-year requirement receive only a partial pension of $130 a month. As a consequence, immigrants arriving before 55 receive only this modest payment, while those who are older when they arrive must wait 10 years to receive it.
Without the ability to speak English or French, and without Canadian income security payments, many of these seniors rely on their families. At the same time, families depend on their older relatives for child care, home care, cooking and cleaning and various other unpaid duties.
Some of the older immigrants are further isolated when they can’t even communicate with their grandchildren. This happens when immigrant seniors can’t speak English or French and their children or grandchildren have lost the first language.
Leaving these seniors and their families to fend for themselves is poor public policy. Governments need to take two important steps:
• Provide more aid for older immigrants to learn English or French immediately after arriving in Canada. There are many ways to tailor newcomer language instruction to the particular needs of older individuals, including specialized classes for seniors. For older adults, it’s essential that the language instructor also be fluent in their first language.
• Assist older immigrants who want to take up paid employment. In addition to improving their language skills, this requires recognition of non-Canadian educational credentials and work experience.
At present, many educational qualifications and much professional experience acquired abroad are not recognized in Canada. As a result, immigrants seeking employment find themselves in a Catch-22, because employers usually require Canadian qualifications and work experience.
Immigrants entering Canada after reaching 50 face particular challenges as returning to school for an extended period to upgrade credentials is a poor investment. It makes little sense, for example, for a 55-year-old to enter a three- or four-year college or university program.
Consequently, the expertise and skills of immigrant professionals who have qualifications acquired abroad and extensive experience in their fields can go to waste. Too often, immigrant seniors eke out a living by driving taxis or taking jobs at gas stations and grocery stores.
This is an inefficient allocation of human capital, especially when Canadian firms are clamouring for skilled workers who have familiarity with international markets.
To better use the skills of older immigrants, governments, educational institutions and professional groups should introduce more short-term courses designed to help those new to the country demonstrate they meet Canadian standards. The condition of a Canadian professional qualification could, in some cases, reasonably be met on successful completion of such courses.
In other cases, employers might want to be more flexible in their expectation of Canadian work experience and education. After all, it’s the decades of demonstrated ability of a potential worker that’s paramount, not the paper credentials.
For immigrant seniors, having greater access to fulfilling employment opportunities would alleviate financial difficulties and feelings of rejection and isolation. More access to jobs would also encourage immigrants to more quickly learn English or French. For the Canadian economy, tapping more deeply into a pool of knowledgeable and motivated workers would boost productivity.
Seniors’ Month is an opportunity to recognize those who have worked hard and continue to contribute to the prosperity we all enjoy today. And governments should make sure that immigrant seniors are not isolated and excluded as a result of language and employment barriers.
June is Seniors’ Month, a time to honour older Canadians – their knowledge, experience and the contributions they make every day to our country. But there’s one group of neglected seniors: those who arrive in Canada after the age 50. These immigrants are often family members sponsored to join children and grandchildren who’ve already settled in Canada. They too are important members of our society.
A research project led by Kenise Murphy Kilbride of Ryerson University found that, during the past 15 years, nearly two-thirds of immigrants 50 and over reported having no knowledge of either official language at their time of entry. Immigrants 65 and older, and female immigrants, are even less likely to speak English or French.
Without knowledge of English or French, older immigrants are at a disadvantage in the labour market. Moreover, they can’t expect any income support from Canada’s social programs. The Old Age Security payments that are made to almost everyone starting at 65 require 10 years of Canadian residency.
Those who meet the 10-year requirement receive only a partial pension of $130 a month. As a consequence, immigrants arriving before 55 receive only this modest payment, while those who are older when they arrive must wait 10 years to receive it.
Without the ability to speak English or French, and without Canadian income security payments, many of these seniors rely on their families. At the same time, families depend on their older relatives for child care, home care, cooking and cleaning and various other unpaid duties.
Some of the older immigrants are further isolated when they can’t even communicate with their grandchildren. This happens when immigrant seniors can’t speak English or French and their children or grandchildren have lost the first language.
Leaving these seniors and their families to fend for themselves is poor public policy. Governments need to take two important steps:
• Provide more aid for older immigrants to learn English or French immediately after arriving in Canada. There are many ways to tailor newcomer language instruction to the particular needs of older individuals, including specialized classes for seniors. For older adults, it’s essential that the language instructor also be fluent in their first language.
• Assist older immigrants who want to take up paid employment. In addition to improving their language skills, this requires recognition of non-Canadian educational credentials and work experience.
At present, many educational qualifications and much professional experience acquired abroad are not recognized in Canada. As a result, immigrants seeking employment find themselves in a Catch-22, because employers usually require Canadian qualifications and work experience.
Immigrants entering Canada after reaching 50 face particular challenges as returning to school for an extended period to upgrade credentials is a poor investment. It makes little sense, for example, for a 55-year-old to enter a three- or four-year college or university program.
Consequently, the expertise and skills of immigrant professionals who have qualifications acquired abroad and extensive experience in their fields can go to waste. Too often, immigrant seniors eke out a living by driving taxis or taking jobs at gas stations and grocery stores.
This is an inefficient allocation of human capital, especially when Canadian firms are clamouring for skilled workers who have familiarity with international markets.
To better use the skills of older immigrants, governments, educational institutions and professional groups should introduce more short-term courses designed to help those new to the country demonstrate they meet Canadian standards. The condition of a Canadian professional qualification could, in some cases, reasonably be met on successful completion of such courses.
In other cases, employers might want to be more flexible in their expectation of Canadian work experience and education. After all, it’s the decades of demonstrated ability of a potential worker that’s paramount, not the paper credentials.
For immigrant seniors, having greater access to fulfilling employment opportunities would alleviate financial difficulties and feelings of rejection and isolation. More access to jobs would also encourage immigrants to more quickly learn English or French. For the Canadian economy, tapping more deeply into a pool of knowledgeable and motivated workers would boost productivity.
Seniors’ Month is an opportunity to recognize those who have worked hard and continue to contribute to the prosperity we all enjoy today. And governments should make sure that immigrant seniors are not isolated and excluded as a result of language and employment barriers.
Teachers are not to blame
All the rhetoric of late regarding rewarding good teachers and penalizing poor ones, of shipping good teachers to underachieving schools and less able educators to schools with higher standards simplistically works to remediate symptoms and in my view does nothing to address the problem.
In my wife's three decades in the classroom, she has dealt with apathy, truancy, hunger, lack of sleep, behavioural issues, language and cultural barriers, limitations of ability, as well as emotional, physical and sexual abuse. These were often present in the same classroom in the same school year.
Whether she was 10 times more competent or only 1/10th as able, little she did or could have done to change things over which she had no control. Reducing the human equation in education to standardized numbers holds no weight of logic.
Washing a car will not fix a faulty motor any more than blowing one's nose will cure a cold. The problem lies in the hands of society in general parents in particular and efforts to download apathy onto the shoulders of educators, whether by reward or punishment, are ludicrous and irresponsible.
In my wife's three decades in the classroom, she has dealt with apathy, truancy, hunger, lack of sleep, behavioural issues, language and cultural barriers, limitations of ability, as well as emotional, physical and sexual abuse. These were often present in the same classroom in the same school year.
Whether she was 10 times more competent or only 1/10th as able, little she did or could have done to change things over which she had no control. Reducing the human equation in education to standardized numbers holds no weight of logic.
Washing a car will not fix a faulty motor any more than blowing one's nose will cure a cold. The problem lies in the hands of society in general parents in particular and efforts to download apathy onto the shoulders of educators, whether by reward or punishment, are ludicrous and irresponsible.
RCMP looking at G8 spending complaint
Letter from defeated Liberal MP targets Muskoka projects funding
The RCMP is in the midst of deciding whether to launch an investigation into the government's controversial spending for the G8 summit last year.
The move comes in the wake of a complaint by former Liberal MP Marlene Jennings, who wrote the Mounties a letter dated April 15 that raised questions about a "possible misappropriation of funds."
Opposition parties immediately pounced on the news Tuesday, pointing to it as evidence that their long-standing claims of government misspending at the summit are well-founded. However, the government brushed off the accusations, saying they were merely a political public relations stunt and that the Tories have done nothing wrong.
Jennings represented Notre-Dame-De-Grace-Lachine in Quebec before losing her seat.
The RCMP acknowledged Tuesday that it has received a "referral."
"The matter is currently with A Division," said Const. Suzanne Lefort, referring to the Commercial Crime Section of the RCMP. "Based on the evaluation of the information provided, the RCMP may or may not initiate an investigation, but we cannot talk about the investigation right now."
In her letter, Jennings wrote that Parliament approved the use of funds for the Border Infrastructure Fund, but that "recent revelations" suggested the money approved by Parliament for that fund were instead used to subsidize infrastructure projects in Muskoka.
Jennings told Postmedia News she thinks the RCMP is dealing with her complaint as a "serious matter" and that although they are only at the beginning stages, she is satisfied they are taking her concerns seriously.
A recent auditor general's report slammed the approval of 32 infrastructure projects that were budgeted to receive $50 million in Tory cabinet minister Tony Clement's riding prior to last summer's G8 summit in Huntsville, Ont.
Interim Auditor General John Wiersema suggested the whole process "lacked transparency" and was submitted to Parliament without "clear and accurate information" about what MPs voted to approve.
The audit also found millions of dollars worth of projects - including construction of public washrooms and gazebos - were authorized without approval from department officials, and ended up having little to do with their original purpose, presented to Parliament as funding for "border infrastructure."
As news of Jennings' letter surfaced Tuesday, Opposition MPs went after Clement, peppering the government with questions about the investigation. During question period Tuesday, the NDP repeatedly asked Clement to explain how funds were doled out to the various projects in his riding.
Foreign Affairs Minister John Baird answered opposition questions about G8 spending. He said the auditor general's report showed the government had no intent to mislead Parliament about how the funds were spent.
Baird called Jennings' complaint a "stunt" by a defeated Liberal candidate who was not focusing on "the issues that really matter to Canadians."
The RCMP is in the midst of deciding whether to launch an investigation into the government's controversial spending for the G8 summit last year.
The move comes in the wake of a complaint by former Liberal MP Marlene Jennings, who wrote the Mounties a letter dated April 15 that raised questions about a "possible misappropriation of funds."
Opposition parties immediately pounced on the news Tuesday, pointing to it as evidence that their long-standing claims of government misspending at the summit are well-founded. However, the government brushed off the accusations, saying they were merely a political public relations stunt and that the Tories have done nothing wrong.
Jennings represented Notre-Dame-De-Grace-Lachine in Quebec before losing her seat.
The RCMP acknowledged Tuesday that it has received a "referral."
"The matter is currently with A Division," said Const. Suzanne Lefort, referring to the Commercial Crime Section of the RCMP. "Based on the evaluation of the information provided, the RCMP may or may not initiate an investigation, but we cannot talk about the investigation right now."
In her letter, Jennings wrote that Parliament approved the use of funds for the Border Infrastructure Fund, but that "recent revelations" suggested the money approved by Parliament for that fund were instead used to subsidize infrastructure projects in Muskoka.
Jennings told Postmedia News she thinks the RCMP is dealing with her complaint as a "serious matter" and that although they are only at the beginning stages, she is satisfied they are taking her concerns seriously.
A recent auditor general's report slammed the approval of 32 infrastructure projects that were budgeted to receive $50 million in Tory cabinet minister Tony Clement's riding prior to last summer's G8 summit in Huntsville, Ont.
Interim Auditor General John Wiersema suggested the whole process "lacked transparency" and was submitted to Parliament without "clear and accurate information" about what MPs voted to approve.
The audit also found millions of dollars worth of projects - including construction of public washrooms and gazebos - were authorized without approval from department officials, and ended up having little to do with their original purpose, presented to Parliament as funding for "border infrastructure."
As news of Jennings' letter surfaced Tuesday, Opposition MPs went after Clement, peppering the government with questions about the investigation. During question period Tuesday, the NDP repeatedly asked Clement to explain how funds were doled out to the various projects in his riding.
Foreign Affairs Minister John Baird answered opposition questions about G8 spending. He said the auditor general's report showed the government had no intent to mislead Parliament about how the funds were spent.
Baird called Jennings' complaint a "stunt" by a defeated Liberal candidate who was not focusing on "the issues that really matter to Canadians."
Canadian middle class is in crisis.
The Canadian middle class is in crisis. Each year, its share of our national income shrinks, relative to that of the richest few. Recent reports show Canada’s wealthiest one per cent accounted for 32 per cent of all income growth between 1997 and 2007 – the most in recorded history. Thanks to skyrocketing executive compensation levels and an aggressive attack on well-paid, family-supporting jobs, the gap between the rich and the rest of us grows ever wider.
Nothing epitomizes this situation more than the recent history of Air Canada. In the last decade, Canada's national carrier has suffered unprecedented financial turbulence, including run-ins with bankruptcy protection. According to the Canadian Auto Workers’ internal research, over the same period Air Canada's CEO at the time, Robert Milton, pocketed $86 million – while thousands of front-line employees were forced to take cuts, to the tune of about $10,000 per year, including an erosion of real wages, lost vacation, paid lunch breaks and other benefits.
Air Canada workers made major sacrifices. The company plowed ahead with plans to do more with less. Work intensified and productivity skyrocketed. Measured in seat miles delivered per employee, labour productivity at Air Canada jumped 75 per cent. Yet many who had earned a good (albeit modest) salary saw their quality of life and working conditions decline.
This storyline has played out in too many workplaces across Canada. “Good” jobs are on the wane, in all sectors – whether in factories, service shops, office buildings, or among the professional classes. Many have come to accept the logic that jobs in the “new economy” are inherently insecure. Pension plans exist only in fairy tales, and personal sacrifice has become the new norm. We accept the mantra that the next generation of workers will be worse off, and assume they simply aren’t in a position to demand better.
This attitude must change – for everyone’s benefit. The squeezing out of Canada’s middle class has major implications for our collective prosperity. Middle-class incomes drive economic growth, pay for public services, support healthy families, and build communities. Society cannot subsist on crumbs left over by the rich. Workers cannot accept the logic that relentless cuts and constant sacrifice will bring better days ahead.
Air Canada employees have already drawn a line in the sand during their current contract talks. They’ve resolved to make up ground on lost wages. They’ve rejected a program of two-tiering, which would make second-class workers of future generations. And in a recent show of solidarity, the CAW, the Canadian Union of Public Employees, and the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers (three unions representing the lion’s share of Air Canada employees) rejected a company proposal to undercut and eventually eliminate the current defined benefit pension plan. By saying “no” to these demands, Air Canada employees are facing down the corporate-led riptide that’s pushing Canada’s middle class to the brink.
With the company’s return to profitability in 2010 and a brighter future on the horizon, Air Canada’s demands for more cuts, fewer full-time jobs, and outsourcing appear baseless. It’s made worse by CEO Calin Rovinescu’s hefty 76 per cent pay hike that landed him $4.55 million in compensation last year, a defined benefit pension that would pay him $351,000 per year at age 65, and a $5 million retention bonus he would be paid just for staying on the job until March 2012. His insistence that workers accept less reeks of hypocrisy.
Not surprisingly, the frustration and anger among Air Canada employees is reaching a breaking point. Demonstrations have been taking place in communities across Canada, with impressive turnouts. CAW members recently voted 98 per cent in favour of strike action, as a last resort. They know that what’s at stake in these negotiations goes far beyond their own self-interest.
Air Canada is recognized as a world-class carrier and has received dozens of awards for quality service, largely because of its hard-working employees. It’s time they receive their fair share.
The Air Canada battle is a principled fight about fairness and justice. It’s about reclaiming workers’ rights to good jobs, as well as our collective ability to demand better from employers and government. It’s about closing that ever-widening wealth gap and strengthening the middle class, for all Canadians.
Are the public interested? ..does Canadian apathy still reign..watch this space?
Nothing epitomizes this situation more than the recent history of Air Canada. In the last decade, Canada's national carrier has suffered unprecedented financial turbulence, including run-ins with bankruptcy protection. According to the Canadian Auto Workers’ internal research, over the same period Air Canada's CEO at the time, Robert Milton, pocketed $86 million – while thousands of front-line employees were forced to take cuts, to the tune of about $10,000 per year, including an erosion of real wages, lost vacation, paid lunch breaks and other benefits.
Air Canada workers made major sacrifices. The company plowed ahead with plans to do more with less. Work intensified and productivity skyrocketed. Measured in seat miles delivered per employee, labour productivity at Air Canada jumped 75 per cent. Yet many who had earned a good (albeit modest) salary saw their quality of life and working conditions decline.
This storyline has played out in too many workplaces across Canada. “Good” jobs are on the wane, in all sectors – whether in factories, service shops, office buildings, or among the professional classes. Many have come to accept the logic that jobs in the “new economy” are inherently insecure. Pension plans exist only in fairy tales, and personal sacrifice has become the new norm. We accept the mantra that the next generation of workers will be worse off, and assume they simply aren’t in a position to demand better.
This attitude must change – for everyone’s benefit. The squeezing out of Canada’s middle class has major implications for our collective prosperity. Middle-class incomes drive economic growth, pay for public services, support healthy families, and build communities. Society cannot subsist on crumbs left over by the rich. Workers cannot accept the logic that relentless cuts and constant sacrifice will bring better days ahead.
Air Canada employees have already drawn a line in the sand during their current contract talks. They’ve resolved to make up ground on lost wages. They’ve rejected a program of two-tiering, which would make second-class workers of future generations. And in a recent show of solidarity, the CAW, the Canadian Union of Public Employees, and the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers (three unions representing the lion’s share of Air Canada employees) rejected a company proposal to undercut and eventually eliminate the current defined benefit pension plan. By saying “no” to these demands, Air Canada employees are facing down the corporate-led riptide that’s pushing Canada’s middle class to the brink.
With the company’s return to profitability in 2010 and a brighter future on the horizon, Air Canada’s demands for more cuts, fewer full-time jobs, and outsourcing appear baseless. It’s made worse by CEO Calin Rovinescu’s hefty 76 per cent pay hike that landed him $4.55 million in compensation last year, a defined benefit pension that would pay him $351,000 per year at age 65, and a $5 million retention bonus he would be paid just for staying on the job until March 2012. His insistence that workers accept less reeks of hypocrisy.
Not surprisingly, the frustration and anger among Air Canada employees is reaching a breaking point. Demonstrations have been taking place in communities across Canada, with impressive turnouts. CAW members recently voted 98 per cent in favour of strike action, as a last resort. They know that what’s at stake in these negotiations goes far beyond their own self-interest.
Air Canada is recognized as a world-class carrier and has received dozens of awards for quality service, largely because of its hard-working employees. It’s time they receive their fair share.
The Air Canada battle is a principled fight about fairness and justice. It’s about reclaiming workers’ rights to good jobs, as well as our collective ability to demand better from employers and government. It’s about closing that ever-widening wealth gap and strengthening the middle class, for all Canadians.
Are the public interested? ..does Canadian apathy still reign..watch this space?
Canadians continue to rack up debts
Are rising consumer debt loads the Achilles' heel of the Canadian economy?
"Low interest rates today do not necessarily mean low rates tomorrow," warned Carney. "Risk reversals, when they happen, can be fierce; the greater the complacency, the more brutal the reckoning."
What's happened to consumer debt levels since he scolded Canada's profligate spenders? Well, apparently nobody was paying much attention, and over the first three months of this year a new study suggests consumer debt has continued to climb.
According to the credit rating agency, TransUnion, Canadians now owe an average of almost $26,000 on their credit cards, lines of credit and auto loans.
That's an increase of 4.5 per cent, or another $1,000, over the same period last year.
The picture becomes even bleaker when you factor mortgage debt into the TransUnion report. Currently, Canadians owe just over $1 trillion in mortgage debt, and that pushes the $26,000 figure to just over $100,000 per Canadian family.
Now let's bring that debt picture into line with earned income.
According to the Ottawa-based Vanier Institute, the average Canadian family is now carrying a household debt that amounts to 150 per cent of their personal disposable income. That's the highest level in history. And stated in a starker way, for every $1,000 a Canadian family earns, they have to make about $1,500 in debt payments.
Sadly, according to TransUnion, Canadians persist in carrying large credit card balances at onerous rates. And the amount being carried on plastic only fell $25 to an average of $3,539 over the last year.
At the same time, the national credit card delinquency rate rose 11 per cent.
And despite Carney's hectoring and the rule changes surrounding lines of credit, they are still the most popular lending vehicle. Excluding mortgages, they accounted for more than 41 per cent of outstanding debt at the end of the first quarter at $33,981, up 5.9 per cent from the first quarter of 2010.
It's interesting to note that Canadian indebtedness rose as interest rates came down steadily over the last ten years. And that begs the question: what will happen when interest rates start to rise again as many analysts believe they must?
In fact, speaking earlier in June, Carney warned that while he was holding the core bank rate at one per cent, it would rise from crisis lows at near zero to what many economists believe to be a more normal rate in the six-per-cent range.
That's where broader economic conditions come to bear on debt levels.
If interest rates jump, the impact will be immediate on floating-rate vehicles like lines of credit and variable-rate mortgages. For example, someone with a 3.5 per cent variable-rate mortgage can carry a $400,000 mortgage at around $2000 a month.
If interest rates climb, and the variable rate reaches six per cent, that same mortgage would jump to almost $2,600 a month.
The debt picture also gets complicated when you compare the growth in mortgages to annual wage gains. In its annual report, the Canadian Association of Accredited Mortgage Professionals said that over the last 15 years, the annual growth rate in mortgage debt has been around 7.5 per cent. And yet wages have been increasing at around 2.3 per cent a year.
Why is that important? Simply because if consumers are already stretched to keep up because of flat-lined wage increases that have barely matched the inflation rate, they have very little room in their budgets to accommodate rising costs triggered by a surge in interest rates.
Obviously loan delinquency and home foreclosures would increase. And if you add a job-killing recession to the mix, you have the onset of a perfect storm that could see an increasing number of Canadians fall into personal bankruptcy.
Perhaps that's why Finance Minister Jim Flaherty joined Carney in warning Canadians to cut back on debt. He certainly fears that the world could be faced with another recession, given the sluggishness of the global economy and the inability of the U.S. to get its fiscal house and economy in order. "I am quite worried," said Flaherty in an interview. "We have lived three-and-a-half years now since the credit crisis started in late August, 2007. We are seeing in Europe, in particular, some very difficult situations."
Fortunately, so far the Canadian economy shows little sign of weakness with the Bank of Canada predicting growth in the three-per-cent range for this year.
But with economic stimulus programs being withdrawn in the U.S. and Flaherty vowing to turn off the spending taps in Ottawa, growth could slow sharply as the country enters 2012. If it does, Canada's debt binge could make things even worse as consumers cut back on their spending to reduce their loan balances.
Only time will tell. But for now, Canadians seem determined to ignore the warnings and keep on borrowing
"Low interest rates today do not necessarily mean low rates tomorrow," warned Carney. "Risk reversals, when they happen, can be fierce; the greater the complacency, the more brutal the reckoning."
What's happened to consumer debt levels since he scolded Canada's profligate spenders? Well, apparently nobody was paying much attention, and over the first three months of this year a new study suggests consumer debt has continued to climb.
According to the credit rating agency, TransUnion, Canadians now owe an average of almost $26,000 on their credit cards, lines of credit and auto loans.
That's an increase of 4.5 per cent, or another $1,000, over the same period last year.
The picture becomes even bleaker when you factor mortgage debt into the TransUnion report. Currently, Canadians owe just over $1 trillion in mortgage debt, and that pushes the $26,000 figure to just over $100,000 per Canadian family.
Now let's bring that debt picture into line with earned income.
According to the Ottawa-based Vanier Institute, the average Canadian family is now carrying a household debt that amounts to 150 per cent of their personal disposable income. That's the highest level in history. And stated in a starker way, for every $1,000 a Canadian family earns, they have to make about $1,500 in debt payments.
Sadly, according to TransUnion, Canadians persist in carrying large credit card balances at onerous rates. And the amount being carried on plastic only fell $25 to an average of $3,539 over the last year.
At the same time, the national credit card delinquency rate rose 11 per cent.
And despite Carney's hectoring and the rule changes surrounding lines of credit, they are still the most popular lending vehicle. Excluding mortgages, they accounted for more than 41 per cent of outstanding debt at the end of the first quarter at $33,981, up 5.9 per cent from the first quarter of 2010.
It's interesting to note that Canadian indebtedness rose as interest rates came down steadily over the last ten years. And that begs the question: what will happen when interest rates start to rise again as many analysts believe they must?
In fact, speaking earlier in June, Carney warned that while he was holding the core bank rate at one per cent, it would rise from crisis lows at near zero to what many economists believe to be a more normal rate in the six-per-cent range.
That's where broader economic conditions come to bear on debt levels.
If interest rates jump, the impact will be immediate on floating-rate vehicles like lines of credit and variable-rate mortgages. For example, someone with a 3.5 per cent variable-rate mortgage can carry a $400,000 mortgage at around $2000 a month.
If interest rates climb, and the variable rate reaches six per cent, that same mortgage would jump to almost $2,600 a month.
The debt picture also gets complicated when you compare the growth in mortgages to annual wage gains. In its annual report, the Canadian Association of Accredited Mortgage Professionals said that over the last 15 years, the annual growth rate in mortgage debt has been around 7.5 per cent. And yet wages have been increasing at around 2.3 per cent a year.
Why is that important? Simply because if consumers are already stretched to keep up because of flat-lined wage increases that have barely matched the inflation rate, they have very little room in their budgets to accommodate rising costs triggered by a surge in interest rates.
Obviously loan delinquency and home foreclosures would increase. And if you add a job-killing recession to the mix, you have the onset of a perfect storm that could see an increasing number of Canadians fall into personal bankruptcy.
Perhaps that's why Finance Minister Jim Flaherty joined Carney in warning Canadians to cut back on debt. He certainly fears that the world could be faced with another recession, given the sluggishness of the global economy and the inability of the U.S. to get its fiscal house and economy in order. "I am quite worried," said Flaherty in an interview. "We have lived three-and-a-half years now since the credit crisis started in late August, 2007. We are seeing in Europe, in particular, some very difficult situations."
Fortunately, so far the Canadian economy shows little sign of weakness with the Bank of Canada predicting growth in the three-per-cent range for this year.
But with economic stimulus programs being withdrawn in the U.S. and Flaherty vowing to turn off the spending taps in Ottawa, growth could slow sharply as the country enters 2012. If it does, Canada's debt binge could make things even worse as consumers cut back on their spending to reduce their loan balances.
Only time will tell. But for now, Canadians seem determined to ignore the warnings and keep on borrowing
Auditor General clearly slams Harper..
The auditor general has at last delivered a stinging rebuke to the Harper government, saying Conservatives kept Parliament in the dark about a $50-million G8 fund that sprayed money on dubious projects in a cabinet minister's riding.
The final report on the G8 legacy infrastructure fund concludes the government "did not clearly or transparently" identify how the money was going to be spent when it sought parliamentary approval for the funding.
Moreover, the report criticizes the unprecedented lack of documentation to explain how and why 32 infrastructure projects in Ontario's Parry Sound-Muskoka region were selected to receive the government largesse.
It concludes that public servants had no input into the selection process; that projects were approved by John Baird, then infrastructure minister, strictly on the advice of Treasury Board President Tony Clement, whose cottage country riding hosted the G8 leaders' summit.
"It is very unusual and troubling," interim auditor general John Wiersema said Thursday after tabling the report, which was prepared under his predecessor Sheila Fraser.
"There is no paper trail behind the selection of the 32 projects. I personally in my career in auditing have not encountered a situation like that where there is absolutely no paper trail behind this."
Responding on behalf of the government, Baird accepted the auditor general's criticism of what he labelled "administrative deficiencies." But he insisted there was no attempt to deliberately mislead Parliament.
However, opposition MPs said the report reveals the government created a secret, political "slush fund" that Clement dispensed around his riding as he saw fit — on gazebos, parks and public toilets that were often hours away from the summit site in Hunstville.
"We've got a bunch of gazebos in the middle of nowhere," groused New Democrat MP Charlie Angus. "This is absolutely appalling misuse of public funds."
Opposition MPs also said the report destroys Clement's credibility as he sets out on his new mission to slash $4 billion worth of annual "fat" from government spending.
"To turn around and say now 'Having been Captain Waste, now I'm Captain Clean-up,' I don't buy it," said Liberal Leader Bob Rae.
"I think it's preposterous. I don't think he has any credibility in telling Canadians how he's going to save money."
In a separate chapter of the report, the auditor general says spending on operations and security for both the G8 and subsequent G20 meetings in Ontario was presented piecemeal to Parliament instead of in a package, leaving MPs poorly informed about total costs.
But in one bright spot, the report says it appears the initially budgeted $1.1 billion for the summits will actually come in around $664 million.
That's because poor co-ordination forced departments to over-budget and set up contingency funds that were not needed.
The final report does not contain the inflammatory language used in a January draft, which baldly asserted the government had "misinformed" Parliament about the G8 legacy fund and suggested the opaque process for approving the funding might actually have been illegal.
That draft created a sensation in April when it was leaked to The Canadian Press in the midst of the federal election campaign, just hours before the crucial English-language leaders' debate. Prime Minister Stephen Harper's Conservatives promptly leaked a subsequent February draft, in which references to misinformation and illegality had been dropped.
Fraser, who has since retired as auditor general, implored voters to wait for the final report before drawing conclusions. She refused to release the report during the campaign, insisting it could only be tabled when Parliament was sitting.
Although the language has been toned down, the gist of the criticism of the legacy fund remains the same in the final report as in the initial draft.
Rae said the more cautious wording makes no difference.
"I don't think it matters a fig, frankly. The fact of the matter is Parliament was misinformed. It was a classic bait and switch."
The report details how, in November 2009, the government tabled supplementary estimates in which it asked Parliament to approve $83 million for a border infrastructure fund aimed at reducing congestion at border crossings.
Parliament was not told that $50 million of the fund was to be devoted to infrastructure projects hundreds of kilometres from the Canada-U.S. border — in Clement's riding.
"In our view, by presenting the request for funding in the supplementary estimates in this way, the government was not being transparent about its purpose," the report says. "Parliament was not provided with a clear explanation of how those funds were to be spent."
Wiersema said the word "misinformed" was excised in the final version because auditors saw no evidence to suggest the government was deliberately trying to mislead Parliament. Rather, he said, the misrepresentation in the estimates appeared to have been done "for matters of expediency."
"Having said all that, going to Parliament requesting money for one thing and using it for something else is a serious matter which we think deserves parliamentary attention."
But Prime Minister Stephen Harper effectively shrugged. Indeed, he candidly told the Commons the border fund has been used routinely for other purposes.
"If the leader of the Liberal party had looked at the border fund he would realize it's frequently used for projects that are not in border communities," Harper said, raising hoots of derision from opposition benches.
The draft report had pointed out that, under the Appropriations Act, funding is supposed to be allocated based on specific items presented in the spending estimates. It added that hiding the legacy monies within the border fund "raises broader legal questions" Parliament may wish to examine.
Those references to possible illegality were dropped in the final version.
Wiersema initially said he's "not aware of any specific law that was broken." However, he later conceded the matter is not clear and suggested the auditor general's office decided it's up to politicians to determine whether "anything illegal took place."
"I think the legal profession could have an interesting, long debate about the wording of the Appropriations Act and whether or not this was inside or outside of the Appropriations Act. We chose not to go there."
Despite their outrage, neither the Liberals nor New Democrats were immediately prepared to ask for a police investigation into possible illegality.
Deputy NDP leader Thomas Mulcair said "there's no doubt whatsoever that there are questions of legality involved." Nevertheless, he said Parliament is "very capable" of dealing with the matter.
The legacy fund was supposed to help Clement's riding prepare for hosting the G8 leaders' summit in June 2010.
"Projects were supposed to support the safe, secure and successful hosting of the summit by improving travel safety, enhancing the image of the region and improving the security of residents and visitors during the event," the auditor general's report notes.
Yet auditors were unable to find any documentation about how projects were selected or even why the government settled on $50 million for Parry Sound-Muskoka when cities that have hosted previous summits received no more than $5 million.
A total of 242 projects were identified by local communities and stakeholders as potential recipients of funding. Although Infrastructure Canada managed the legacy fund, it did not manage the application intake or identification of priorities for funding and, thus, could provide no documentation about how projects were reviewed or chosen.
And while the summit management office at Foreign Affairs was supposed to ensure the needs of the summit were supported, auditors found the office was not involved in reviewing or selecting the projects and, therefore, had no documentation either.
Clement later told a news conference that the list of 242 originally proposed projects was compiled by six mayors in his riding. He asked them to whittle it down to their top priorities, which they did, producing the 32 which eventually received funding.
"So there's no mystery here," Clement said.
Baird, now foreign affairs minister, took sole responsibility for approving the projects. He said he also signed off on the way the funds were not directly disclosed in the spending estimates. With only a year to complete projects before the summit, he said haste was of the essence so he took the advice of bureaucrats to lump G8 legacy monies under the existing border fund.
Baird pointed out that the government publicly announced the $50 million G8 legacy fund and disclosed all the approved projects on Infrastructure Canada's website, complete with photos.
"Obviously, we had no motive to keep this secret or quiet. We were announcing it publicly," he said.
The audit did not attempt to evaluate the 32 projects that received funding. But opposition parties have long had a field day enumerating questionable projects that appear to have little, if anything, to do with hosting the summit.
Among the most controversial:
— $274,000 on public toilets 20 kilometres from the summit site in Huntsville.
— $100,000 on a gazebo an hour's drive away.
— $1.1 million for sidewalk and tree upgrades 100 kilometres away.
— $194,000 for a park 100 kilometres away.
— $745,000 on downtown improvements for three towns nearly 70 kilometres away.
In MY view...Its a disgrace to the Canadians people Intelligence
The final report on the G8 legacy infrastructure fund concludes the government "did not clearly or transparently" identify how the money was going to be spent when it sought parliamentary approval for the funding.
Moreover, the report criticizes the unprecedented lack of documentation to explain how and why 32 infrastructure projects in Ontario's Parry Sound-Muskoka region were selected to receive the government largesse.
It concludes that public servants had no input into the selection process; that projects were approved by John Baird, then infrastructure minister, strictly on the advice of Treasury Board President Tony Clement, whose cottage country riding hosted the G8 leaders' summit.
"It is very unusual and troubling," interim auditor general John Wiersema said Thursday after tabling the report, which was prepared under his predecessor Sheila Fraser.
"There is no paper trail behind the selection of the 32 projects. I personally in my career in auditing have not encountered a situation like that where there is absolutely no paper trail behind this."
Responding on behalf of the government, Baird accepted the auditor general's criticism of what he labelled "administrative deficiencies." But he insisted there was no attempt to deliberately mislead Parliament.
However, opposition MPs said the report reveals the government created a secret, political "slush fund" that Clement dispensed around his riding as he saw fit — on gazebos, parks and public toilets that were often hours away from the summit site in Hunstville.
"We've got a bunch of gazebos in the middle of nowhere," groused New Democrat MP Charlie Angus. "This is absolutely appalling misuse of public funds."
Opposition MPs also said the report destroys Clement's credibility as he sets out on his new mission to slash $4 billion worth of annual "fat" from government spending.
"To turn around and say now 'Having been Captain Waste, now I'm Captain Clean-up,' I don't buy it," said Liberal Leader Bob Rae.
"I think it's preposterous. I don't think he has any credibility in telling Canadians how he's going to save money."
In a separate chapter of the report, the auditor general says spending on operations and security for both the G8 and subsequent G20 meetings in Ontario was presented piecemeal to Parliament instead of in a package, leaving MPs poorly informed about total costs.
But in one bright spot, the report says it appears the initially budgeted $1.1 billion for the summits will actually come in around $664 million.
That's because poor co-ordination forced departments to over-budget and set up contingency funds that were not needed.
The final report does not contain the inflammatory language used in a January draft, which baldly asserted the government had "misinformed" Parliament about the G8 legacy fund and suggested the opaque process for approving the funding might actually have been illegal.
That draft created a sensation in April when it was leaked to The Canadian Press in the midst of the federal election campaign, just hours before the crucial English-language leaders' debate. Prime Minister Stephen Harper's Conservatives promptly leaked a subsequent February draft, in which references to misinformation and illegality had been dropped.
Fraser, who has since retired as auditor general, implored voters to wait for the final report before drawing conclusions. She refused to release the report during the campaign, insisting it could only be tabled when Parliament was sitting.
Although the language has been toned down, the gist of the criticism of the legacy fund remains the same in the final report as in the initial draft.
Rae said the more cautious wording makes no difference.
"I don't think it matters a fig, frankly. The fact of the matter is Parliament was misinformed. It was a classic bait and switch."
The report details how, in November 2009, the government tabled supplementary estimates in which it asked Parliament to approve $83 million for a border infrastructure fund aimed at reducing congestion at border crossings.
Parliament was not told that $50 million of the fund was to be devoted to infrastructure projects hundreds of kilometres from the Canada-U.S. border — in Clement's riding.
"In our view, by presenting the request for funding in the supplementary estimates in this way, the government was not being transparent about its purpose," the report says. "Parliament was not provided with a clear explanation of how those funds were to be spent."
Wiersema said the word "misinformed" was excised in the final version because auditors saw no evidence to suggest the government was deliberately trying to mislead Parliament. Rather, he said, the misrepresentation in the estimates appeared to have been done "for matters of expediency."
"Having said all that, going to Parliament requesting money for one thing and using it for something else is a serious matter which we think deserves parliamentary attention."
But Prime Minister Stephen Harper effectively shrugged. Indeed, he candidly told the Commons the border fund has been used routinely for other purposes.
"If the leader of the Liberal party had looked at the border fund he would realize it's frequently used for projects that are not in border communities," Harper said, raising hoots of derision from opposition benches.
The draft report had pointed out that, under the Appropriations Act, funding is supposed to be allocated based on specific items presented in the spending estimates. It added that hiding the legacy monies within the border fund "raises broader legal questions" Parliament may wish to examine.
Those references to possible illegality were dropped in the final version.
Wiersema initially said he's "not aware of any specific law that was broken." However, he later conceded the matter is not clear and suggested the auditor general's office decided it's up to politicians to determine whether "anything illegal took place."
"I think the legal profession could have an interesting, long debate about the wording of the Appropriations Act and whether or not this was inside or outside of the Appropriations Act. We chose not to go there."
Despite their outrage, neither the Liberals nor New Democrats were immediately prepared to ask for a police investigation into possible illegality.
Deputy NDP leader Thomas Mulcair said "there's no doubt whatsoever that there are questions of legality involved." Nevertheless, he said Parliament is "very capable" of dealing with the matter.
The legacy fund was supposed to help Clement's riding prepare for hosting the G8 leaders' summit in June 2010.
"Projects were supposed to support the safe, secure and successful hosting of the summit by improving travel safety, enhancing the image of the region and improving the security of residents and visitors during the event," the auditor general's report notes.
Yet auditors were unable to find any documentation about how projects were selected or even why the government settled on $50 million for Parry Sound-Muskoka when cities that have hosted previous summits received no more than $5 million.
A total of 242 projects were identified by local communities and stakeholders as potential recipients of funding. Although Infrastructure Canada managed the legacy fund, it did not manage the application intake or identification of priorities for funding and, thus, could provide no documentation about how projects were reviewed or chosen.
And while the summit management office at Foreign Affairs was supposed to ensure the needs of the summit were supported, auditors found the office was not involved in reviewing or selecting the projects and, therefore, had no documentation either.
Clement later told a news conference that the list of 242 originally proposed projects was compiled by six mayors in his riding. He asked them to whittle it down to their top priorities, which they did, producing the 32 which eventually received funding.
"So there's no mystery here," Clement said.
Baird, now foreign affairs minister, took sole responsibility for approving the projects. He said he also signed off on the way the funds were not directly disclosed in the spending estimates. With only a year to complete projects before the summit, he said haste was of the essence so he took the advice of bureaucrats to lump G8 legacy monies under the existing border fund.
Baird pointed out that the government publicly announced the $50 million G8 legacy fund and disclosed all the approved projects on Infrastructure Canada's website, complete with photos.
"Obviously, we had no motive to keep this secret or quiet. We were announcing it publicly," he said.
The audit did not attempt to evaluate the 32 projects that received funding. But opposition parties have long had a field day enumerating questionable projects that appear to have little, if anything, to do with hosting the summit.
Among the most controversial:
— $274,000 on public toilets 20 kilometres from the summit site in Huntsville.
— $100,000 on a gazebo an hour's drive away.
— $1.1 million for sidewalk and tree upgrades 100 kilometres away.
— $194,000 for a park 100 kilometres away.
— $745,000 on downtown improvements for three towns nearly 70 kilometres away.
In MY view...Its a disgrace to the Canadians people Intelligence
Falling seniors: A preventable problem, a ‘huge health burden’
Fractured hips, pneumonia and significantly reduced mobility are among the most deadly health risks faced by seniors.
But for many, these threats are not an inevitable part of aging. They are caused by falls, an entirely preventable problem that leads to a vast array of serious injuries and the onset of debilitating illnesses that rob seniors of their independence, mobility, and in many cases, their lives.
* Seniors deserve better fall prevention
* Canada may need more geriatricians
“It’s just a huge health burden,” said Vicky Scott, clinical associate professor at the University of British Columbia and senior adviser on fall and injury prevention for the B. C. government. “[Falls are] that trigger event that seems to really spiral [the health of seniors] downward.”
In Canada, the issue of seniors falling isn’t unrecognized. Leading Canadian researchers have helped bring attention to the problem, and now many parts of the country have fall prevention programs for homes, hospitals, residential-care facilities and other centres.
But experts say the implementation, enforcement and scope of these programs are often lacking and there is not enough pressure on health-care facilities or home-care programs to prioritize fall-prevention strategies.
At the same time, such programs don’t account for the fact that thousands of seniors living independently aren’t aware of the risks they face and never have a discussion about it with their physician.
These glaring gaps lead to countless injuries, unnecessary deaths and a major strain on the health-care system – and a growing number of experts in the field say things need to change.
“It’s common, it’s preventable and the prevention for this will protect from other diseases as well,” said Karim Kahn, leader of fracture prevention at the Centre for Hip Health and Mobility, a Vancouver-based research institute focused on arthritis and hip-related fractures.
Studies show that one in three people 65 and older, and perhaps more, will fall at least once a year.
Not all falls lead to serious injury. But falls cause more than 90 per cent of all hip fractures in seniors. One in five seniors who fractures a hip will die within a year of the break.
Falls are also a significant cause of head injuries, femur fractures, wrist and hand injuries and back and knee problems, as well as a shattered sense of self-confidence that leads many seniors to restrict activities and become fearful of venturing away from home.
Almost half of all falls occur in the place seniors feel most secure: in and around their home. Tripping while going up or down stairs, stumbling while walking across a room or slipping on ice are some of the most common falls suffered by seniors.
In 2008-2009, nearly 75,000 Canadians 65 and older were hospitalized after falling, according to a forthcoming report from the Public Health Agency of Canada.
Falls kill thousands of seniors a year and cause one-half of deaths due to injury among the elderly, a rate higher than deaths due to pneumonia or diabetes.
A large number of seniors don’t die immediately after a fall. But for many, the problems are just beginning. Lengthy hospital stays, months of difficult recovery and relocation from home to a retirement facility are common. So are serious complications that arise when a person is bedridden and weakened for significant amounts of time after a fall, particularly pneumonia, which is often fatal.
“The story is that you go from having a functional, happy person … [to someone] in a nursing home,” Dr. Khan said.
The health-care costs associated with falls are estimated at $2.8-billion. Others estimate that when lost productivity is factored in, the total cost balloons to more than $6-billion.
But for many, these threats are not an inevitable part of aging. They are caused by falls, an entirely preventable problem that leads to a vast array of serious injuries and the onset of debilitating illnesses that rob seniors of their independence, mobility, and in many cases, their lives.
* Seniors deserve better fall prevention
* Canada may need more geriatricians
“It’s just a huge health burden,” said Vicky Scott, clinical associate professor at the University of British Columbia and senior adviser on fall and injury prevention for the B. C. government. “[Falls are] that trigger event that seems to really spiral [the health of seniors] downward.”
In Canada, the issue of seniors falling isn’t unrecognized. Leading Canadian researchers have helped bring attention to the problem, and now many parts of the country have fall prevention programs for homes, hospitals, residential-care facilities and other centres.
But experts say the implementation, enforcement and scope of these programs are often lacking and there is not enough pressure on health-care facilities or home-care programs to prioritize fall-prevention strategies.
At the same time, such programs don’t account for the fact that thousands of seniors living independently aren’t aware of the risks they face and never have a discussion about it with their physician.
These glaring gaps lead to countless injuries, unnecessary deaths and a major strain on the health-care system – and a growing number of experts in the field say things need to change.
“It’s common, it’s preventable and the prevention for this will protect from other diseases as well,” said Karim Kahn, leader of fracture prevention at the Centre for Hip Health and Mobility, a Vancouver-based research institute focused on arthritis and hip-related fractures.
Studies show that one in three people 65 and older, and perhaps more, will fall at least once a year.
Not all falls lead to serious injury. But falls cause more than 90 per cent of all hip fractures in seniors. One in five seniors who fractures a hip will die within a year of the break.
Falls are also a significant cause of head injuries, femur fractures, wrist and hand injuries and back and knee problems, as well as a shattered sense of self-confidence that leads many seniors to restrict activities and become fearful of venturing away from home.
Almost half of all falls occur in the place seniors feel most secure: in and around their home. Tripping while going up or down stairs, stumbling while walking across a room or slipping on ice are some of the most common falls suffered by seniors.
In 2008-2009, nearly 75,000 Canadians 65 and older were hospitalized after falling, according to a forthcoming report from the Public Health Agency of Canada.
Falls kill thousands of seniors a year and cause one-half of deaths due to injury among the elderly, a rate higher than deaths due to pneumonia or diabetes.
A large number of seniors don’t die immediately after a fall. But for many, the problems are just beginning. Lengthy hospital stays, months of difficult recovery and relocation from home to a retirement facility are common. So are serious complications that arise when a person is bedridden and weakened for significant amounts of time after a fall, particularly pneumonia, which is often fatal.
“The story is that you go from having a functional, happy person … [to someone] in a nursing home,” Dr. Khan said.
The health-care costs associated with falls are estimated at $2.8-billion. Others estimate that when lost productivity is factored in, the total cost balloons to more than $6-billion.
The new ways thieves are stealing your identity
Identity thieves are nothing if not creative; they can take the most seemingly innocent item and turn it into the keys to unlocking your financial fortress. The more technology encroaches into our daily lives, the more access we give them to our personal information. (There are many different ways to be victimized through home ownership - learn how to identify and avoid these crimes. Check out Mortgage Fraud: Understanding And Avoiding It.)
Social Networks
Exactly how much information do you share on social networks? When you complete your profile or account information for a social networking site, they ask for personal information such as your date of birth, address, phone number and even your hometown or place of birth. While giving all of this information to a social networking site might enhance your ability to connect with other users, it also puts very important information out for potential thieves to use. Make their job harder by leaving these sections blank.
And it's not just about the information you give in your profile - you also need to consider what you say within your profile. For example, many financial websites like to use your mother's maiden name as a failsafe for identifying you when you log on or forget your password. But what happens if you happen to mention your mother's maiden name in a social network status update? Don't just watch what you put in your profile, watch what you mention in passing too - potential identity thieves certainly will.
Unsecured Websites
When you input information onto a website and submit it - let's say to the seller of an item in an online store - the data that you enter into the required fields must be transmitted to the receiving company. In between your computer (the data entry point) and the final recipient's, the data can be redirected to an identity thief unless the website is secured against such an action.
It's easy to tell the difference between a secured and unsecured website when you are entering personal information or credit card numbers into a site. The first is to look at the website's address in your address bar. A site that begins with "http://www" is not secure. When you see an "s" after http (as in, https://www), then you know the site is secure.
Another way to find out if you are entering data into a secured site is to look at the bottom right or left side of your browser for a little padlock icon. This icon also indicates that the website transmission is secure. (Follow this sound advice and plan for a comfortable future. See 10 Tips For Achieving Financial Security.)
Cell Phones
As phones get "smarter," we leave more and more important information on them that enables thieves to easily steal our private financial data when we sell or donate old phones after an upgrade. If you use your phone to log in to your bank, billing or social networking accounts, then you need to erase any stored data before you let your cell phone leave your possession.
Potential Fraud
We've all heard the horror story of identity theft and how thieves have hacked into bank accounts and credit cards - or opened new bank accounts and credit cards in the names of those they've stolen from. But there are other ways in which thieves can apply your identity and steal from your good name, and that includes utilities fraud.
Utilities fraud involves the creation of utility company accounts in the name of the victim. This could include power, cable and other accounts. This type of fraud may not show up when you monitor your credit report, and you may not get bills for the service alerting you of the problem, so it is important to guard your information carefully in order to avoid becoming a victim.
The Bottom Line
One of the most important (and most basic) things you can protect is your identity. Because not only does this bleed into your financial life and situation, it also affects your reputation, credit report and ability to get certain employment positions. Take the necessary steps to fend off identity thieves before they get your information in their sights. (Make sure there are no errors holding you back from obtaining a loan.
Social Networks
Exactly how much information do you share on social networks? When you complete your profile or account information for a social networking site, they ask for personal information such as your date of birth, address, phone number and even your hometown or place of birth. While giving all of this information to a social networking site might enhance your ability to connect with other users, it also puts very important information out for potential thieves to use. Make their job harder by leaving these sections blank.
And it's not just about the information you give in your profile - you also need to consider what you say within your profile. For example, many financial websites like to use your mother's maiden name as a failsafe for identifying you when you log on or forget your password. But what happens if you happen to mention your mother's maiden name in a social network status update? Don't just watch what you put in your profile, watch what you mention in passing too - potential identity thieves certainly will.
Unsecured Websites
When you input information onto a website and submit it - let's say to the seller of an item in an online store - the data that you enter into the required fields must be transmitted to the receiving company. In between your computer (the data entry point) and the final recipient's, the data can be redirected to an identity thief unless the website is secured against such an action.
It's easy to tell the difference between a secured and unsecured website when you are entering personal information or credit card numbers into a site. The first is to look at the website's address in your address bar. A site that begins with "http://www" is not secure. When you see an "s" after http (as in, https://www), then you know the site is secure.
Another way to find out if you are entering data into a secured site is to look at the bottom right or left side of your browser for a little padlock icon. This icon also indicates that the website transmission is secure. (Follow this sound advice and plan for a comfortable future. See 10 Tips For Achieving Financial Security.)
Cell Phones
As phones get "smarter," we leave more and more important information on them that enables thieves to easily steal our private financial data when we sell or donate old phones after an upgrade. If you use your phone to log in to your bank, billing or social networking accounts, then you need to erase any stored data before you let your cell phone leave your possession.
Potential Fraud
We've all heard the horror story of identity theft and how thieves have hacked into bank accounts and credit cards - or opened new bank accounts and credit cards in the names of those they've stolen from. But there are other ways in which thieves can apply your identity and steal from your good name, and that includes utilities fraud.
Utilities fraud involves the creation of utility company accounts in the name of the victim. This could include power, cable and other accounts. This type of fraud may not show up when you monitor your credit report, and you may not get bills for the service alerting you of the problem, so it is important to guard your information carefully in order to avoid becoming a victim.
The Bottom Line
One of the most important (and most basic) things you can protect is your identity. Because not only does this bleed into your financial life and situation, it also affects your reputation, credit report and ability to get certain employment positions. Take the necessary steps to fend off identity thieves before they get your information in their sights. (Make sure there are no errors holding you back from obtaining a loan.
Quebec parents challenge no-religion rule for daycares
Quebec’s effort to oust God from daycare is facing a court challenge from a group of parents, who say the plan is forcing educators to do everything from rewrite nursery tunes to ban angels from Christmas trees.
A coalition of mostly Catholic and Jewish parents has filed an injunction to suspend the no-religion rules, which are to come into effect in the province’s 1,400 publicly financed daycares starting Wednesday. Where are the Anglicans I ask
Quebec mayor reaches out to French-speaking Muslim immigrants
Can God be ousted from the singalong circle?
Quebec group pushes ‘interculturalism' in place of multiculturalism
The new policy brings the province’s push toward secularism to the tot-and-toddler set by prohibiting the teaching of a particular faith – and Family Minister Yolande James says the regime will launch Wednesday as scheduled.
“This was something that was well thought-out,” Ms. James said in an interview. Quebec’s daycares cost parents $7 a day and are heavily subsidized by the state, she said. “In that context, contrary to private daycare, the teaching of religion is not appropriate.”
But a newly formed group, Quebeckers for Equal Rights to Subsidized Day Cares, argues the government directives are vague, a bureaucratic headache to apply, and discriminate against parents who believe daycare's should be an extension of the family home. The group is challenging the rules under the Quebec and Canadian charters.
“This is a fundamental question,” said Marie-Josée Hogue, lawyer for the coalition, which includes more than 200 parents and associations from the Catholic, Jewish and Egyptian Copt communities. “The benefits of the law should be the same without distinctions like religion and belief.” Daycare, she said, “is a substitute to the home environment.”
The government’s directives lay out a complex set of dos-and-don’ts: It’s okay if a three-year-old initiates a religious act individually, but an educator can’t do the same if it’s aimed at children. A priest or imam can visit a daycare but not offer religious instruction.
In practice, at least one daycare director has already told an educator to drop a reference to God in the popular song Au Clair de la Lune, according to members of the coalition. Books with Bible stories are being pulled off shelves, and children can henceforth be told about the building of Noah’s Ark but not that God commanded it.
“This will be paralyzing for our educators. They are emotionally broken. For them it’s like punishing the children,” said Danielle Sabbah, president of an association of 17 Jewish daycares. “In Jewish culture it’s very difficult to separate religion, tradition and culture.”
The coalition said that when the Parti Québécois government introduced its popular universal daycare network in the 1998, the centres were to be reflections of the diverse communities they served. Today about 100 daycares offer some form of religious focus representing the Catholic, Muslim, Jewish and Greek Orthodox faiths. The new policy, announced last year, will be implemented by 58 inspectors; daycares found in violation risk losing their subsidy, which amounts to about $40 per child per day.
A coalition of mostly Catholic and Jewish parents has filed an injunction to suspend the no-religion rules, which are to come into effect in the province’s 1,400 publicly financed daycares starting Wednesday. Where are the Anglicans I ask
Quebec mayor reaches out to French-speaking Muslim immigrants
Can God be ousted from the singalong circle?
Quebec group pushes ‘interculturalism' in place of multiculturalism
The new policy brings the province’s push toward secularism to the tot-and-toddler set by prohibiting the teaching of a particular faith – and Family Minister Yolande James says the regime will launch Wednesday as scheduled.
“This was something that was well thought-out,” Ms. James said in an interview. Quebec’s daycares cost parents $7 a day and are heavily subsidized by the state, she said. “In that context, contrary to private daycare, the teaching of religion is not appropriate.”
But a newly formed group, Quebeckers for Equal Rights to Subsidized Day Cares, argues the government directives are vague, a bureaucratic headache to apply, and discriminate against parents who believe daycare's should be an extension of the family home. The group is challenging the rules under the Quebec and Canadian charters.
“This is a fundamental question,” said Marie-Josée Hogue, lawyer for the coalition, which includes more than 200 parents and associations from the Catholic, Jewish and Egyptian Copt communities. “The benefits of the law should be the same without distinctions like religion and belief.” Daycare, she said, “is a substitute to the home environment.”
The government’s directives lay out a complex set of dos-and-don’ts: It’s okay if a three-year-old initiates a religious act individually, but an educator can’t do the same if it’s aimed at children. A priest or imam can visit a daycare but not offer religious instruction.
In practice, at least one daycare director has already told an educator to drop a reference to God in the popular song Au Clair de la Lune, according to members of the coalition. Books with Bible stories are being pulled off shelves, and children can henceforth be told about the building of Noah’s Ark but not that God commanded it.
“This will be paralyzing for our educators. They are emotionally broken. For them it’s like punishing the children,” said Danielle Sabbah, president of an association of 17 Jewish daycares. “In Jewish culture it’s very difficult to separate religion, tradition and culture.”
The coalition said that when the Parti Québécois government introduced its popular universal daycare network in the 1998, the centres were to be reflections of the diverse communities they served. Today about 100 daycares offer some form of religious focus representing the Catholic, Muslim, Jewish and Greek Orthodox faiths. The new policy, announced last year, will be implemented by 58 inspectors; daycares found in violation risk losing their subsidy, which amounts to about $40 per child per day.
Many women don’t know warning signs of stroke
Many women don’t know warning signs of stroke and therefore
Canadian women are one-third more likely to die of stroke than men, in large part because they are woefully uninformed about the warning signs of stroke and slow to get treatment.
That is the conclusion of a new study from the Heart and Stroke Foundation of Canada.
A survey commissioned by the foundation shows that one in three women cannot identify even two of the warning signs of stroke – sudden numbness, difficulty speaking, blurry vision, severe headache and dizziness and they are no better at identifying the underlying causes, according to the poll: One in four women cannot identify even one major stroke risk factor, which include high blood pressure, smoking, diabetes and physical inactivity.
“Canadian women need to be better stroke detectors,” said Frank Silver, a neurologist and medical director of the Toronto West Stroke Network.
He said the knowledge is particularly important because about 80 per cent of strokes are preventable. Additionally, Dr. Silver said, a lot of the devastating consequences of stroke – paralysis, loss of speech, blindness, memory loss – can be prevented with prompt treatment.
“A patient can go from being perfectly devastated to fine right before your eyes if they get prompt treatment,” Dr. Silver said. “We call it the Lazarus effect.”
That was the case for Ann Dooley, a professor of medieval and Celtic studies at the University of Toronto.
In the early morning hours of April 21, she was speaking to her husband when the words leaving her mouth became nothing but gibberish. He immediately called 9-1-1.
When the paramedics arrived, they asked Prof. Dooley to smile – but only half her mouth moved.
“They knew immediately it was a stroke,” she said. “But there was no pain. I was totally serene.”
At Toronto Western Hospital, Prof. Dooley was treated with tissue plasminogen activator (tPA), known colloquially as clot-busters. The drug, which dissolves clots that block blood flow to the brain, can totally reverse stroke symptoms if administered promptly.
Within a few hours, Prof. Dooley was speaking normally again and felt fine.
But, post-recovery, she was determined to educate others about the risks and warning signs of stroke. “I’m an educated woman but I had absolutely no idea. Stroke never entered my consciousness because I was healthy,” Prof. Dooley said.
The principal risk factor for stroke is hypertension, a condition that increases with age.
“Getting high blood pressure under control makes a tremendous difference; it can really lower your risk of stroke,” Dr. Silver said.
High blood pressure is treated principally with lifestyle modification – reducing salt intake, losing weight and increasing physical activity – and with medications like diuretics.
People with atrial fibrilation – irregular and sometimes rapid heartbeat – are also at much higher risk of stroke, but it can be prevented with anti-coagulants.
In 2007, the most recent year for which detailed statistics are available, a total of 8,262 women and 5,719 men died of stroke.
In total, 69,503 Canadians died of heart disease, including ischemic heart disease, heart attack and stroke, divided almost evenly between men and women.
Canadian women are one-third more likely to die of stroke than men, in large part because they are woefully uninformed about the warning signs of stroke and slow to get treatment.
That is the conclusion of a new study from the Heart and Stroke Foundation of Canada.
A survey commissioned by the foundation shows that one in three women cannot identify even two of the warning signs of stroke – sudden numbness, difficulty speaking, blurry vision, severe headache and dizziness and they are no better at identifying the underlying causes, according to the poll: One in four women cannot identify even one major stroke risk factor, which include high blood pressure, smoking, diabetes and physical inactivity.
“Canadian women need to be better stroke detectors,” said Frank Silver, a neurologist and medical director of the Toronto West Stroke Network.
He said the knowledge is particularly important because about 80 per cent of strokes are preventable. Additionally, Dr. Silver said, a lot of the devastating consequences of stroke – paralysis, loss of speech, blindness, memory loss – can be prevented with prompt treatment.
“A patient can go from being perfectly devastated to fine right before your eyes if they get prompt treatment,” Dr. Silver said. “We call it the Lazarus effect.”
That was the case for Ann Dooley, a professor of medieval and Celtic studies at the University of Toronto.
In the early morning hours of April 21, she was speaking to her husband when the words leaving her mouth became nothing but gibberish. He immediately called 9-1-1.
When the paramedics arrived, they asked Prof. Dooley to smile – but only half her mouth moved.
“They knew immediately it was a stroke,” she said. “But there was no pain. I was totally serene.”
At Toronto Western Hospital, Prof. Dooley was treated with tissue plasminogen activator (tPA), known colloquially as clot-busters. The drug, which dissolves clots that block blood flow to the brain, can totally reverse stroke symptoms if administered promptly.
Within a few hours, Prof. Dooley was speaking normally again and felt fine.
But, post-recovery, she was determined to educate others about the risks and warning signs of stroke. “I’m an educated woman but I had absolutely no idea. Stroke never entered my consciousness because I was healthy,” Prof. Dooley said.
The principal risk factor for stroke is hypertension, a condition that increases with age.
“Getting high blood pressure under control makes a tremendous difference; it can really lower your risk of stroke,” Dr. Silver said.
High blood pressure is treated principally with lifestyle modification – reducing salt intake, losing weight and increasing physical activity – and with medications like diuretics.
People with atrial fibrilation – irregular and sometimes rapid heartbeat – are also at much higher risk of stroke, but it can be prevented with anti-coagulants.
In 2007, the most recent year for which detailed statistics are available, a total of 8,262 women and 5,719 men died of stroke.
In total, 69,503 Canadians died of heart disease, including ischemic heart disease, heart attack and stroke, divided almost evenly between men and women.