Camille Labchuk

“One of the most dangerous things that can happen to a child is to kill or torture an animal and get away with it.” – Anthropologist Margaret Meade

The connection between cruelty to animals and violence toward humans is well-documented. Decades of research tells us that people who abuse animals rarely stop there – they frequently progress, becoming violent toward humans as well. Animal abuse is not only reliably predictive of future general violence toward humans, but it also correlated with violence in its most extreme forms. Serial killers tend to follow the same pattern — they practiced being human-killers by first torturing and killing animals.

Given this reality, we might expect authorities to take swift action when children are suspected of abusing animals. But tragically, the authorities have turned a blind eye to the case of a puppy named Mylee, who was savagely beaten to death last month by a nine-year old boy in Northumberland County. According to the local newspaper, Mylee’s family began searching for her when she didn’t return home one night. A few days later, children at school began to brag about having killed Mylee, and her family’s worst fears came true when they discovered her bloody and beaten body, frozen beneath the ice in a creek in the woods.

And to make matter worse, both the police and the Ontario Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (OSPCA) have apparently decided to do nothing. No OSPCA investigation. The parents face no charges. The boy in question apparently admitted to the police that he had hit Mylee with a stick, and has allegedly bragged about having killed other dogs and several cats. The police indicated his young age is part of the reason why no action will be taken — children under 12 in Canada cannot be charged with criminal offences. But this doesn’t mean nothing can be done — social and mental health services can intervene if there is evidence the child did something that would be a crime if he was older. But there is no indication this will occur.

It should disturb every one of us that the police and OSPCA have done nothing about this. First, this signals that cruelty to animals is not really a big deal. It sends an especially strong message that children should be able to get away with abusing animals because of their young age. And second, it puts every one of us at risk — humans and other animals. Frankly, it terrifies me that a nine-year old has potentially already killed multiple animals at that young age. I’m not a psychologist (although it was my undergraduate degree) but the research suggests someone with such a background has strong potential for violence toward humans in the future. The image of a ticking time bomb.

Given the strong social science evidence that children who abuse animals will unleash violence upon people, age should not shield a child from responsibility for his actions. Perhaps we should even consider enacting new laws to ensure children who abuse animals receive appropriate treatment and monitoring as early as possible, to ensure they do not harm others in the future.

The public deserves protection from twisted, sadistic, abusive individuals, and so do animals. Allowing the horrific and disturbing beating of a tiny puppy to go uninvestigated is both morally offensive and dangerous to public safety.

This will be a quick post, since I’m technically on vacation with family in Montreal…. but I just couldn’t resist sharing some exciting news today. As the Victoria Times Colonist is reporting, a new poll by McAllister research is showing that Elizabeth May is running neck and neck with incumbent MP, Conservative cabinet minister Gary Lunn. By the numbers (first choice support):

Elizabeth May (GRN) – 32%

Gary Lunn (CON) – 34%

Renee Hetherington (LIB) – 17%

Edith Loring-Kuhanga (NDP) – 17%

Last summer, after it became known that Elizabeth May would run in SGI, I wrote this in a blog post:

Clearly, many voters in the riding want to rid themselves of Gary Lunn, but have been unable to rally around a single opponent. Introduce Elizabeth May into the equation, and you’ve got a rallying point.

What the results of this poll are showing is that May has indeed become that rallying point. With as much support as her Liberal and NDP components combined, it’s clear that she is attracting support from across the political spectrum, and clear that she is the candidate with momentum. She is obviously best-positioned to knock off Gary Lunn, who is reviled by most voters in the riding. And as voters in SGI who usually support the Liberals or NDP gradually realize that May has a stellar shot at taking the seat from Lunn, I predict that more of them will shift into the May camp.

But it’s not only Liberal/NDP types who are shifting toward May — her candidacy seems to be resonating well with former Lunn supporters as well. Lunn’s numbers in this poll are down by nearly 10% from his 2008 election results, and it’s likely that some of this support is moving toward May. When you think about it, it makes perfect sense. The Green Party’s policies around fiscal responsibility and environmental stewardship resonate strongly with many small-c conservative voters. And with the Prime Minister’s big-spending government (bigger budgets than any Canadian government ever), his divisive war against Canadian police chiefs and sound gun policies, and his refusal to address climate change, it’s no wonder his candidate in SGI is losing support.

But I digress. The poll also shows that voters in SGI care about a number of issues, including environment, conservation, pollution, homelessness/poverty, and economy/jobs — all issues the for which the Green Party has strong policies. This is obviously good news.

There’s much more useful data contained in this poll that the campaign team in SGI is already making use of, including some great information around second choice candidates for SGI voters. But the long and short of it is that Elizabeth May has a real chance to win this riding. Now, we have to focus on providing her team with the support they need to pull off a victory. We need volunteers and we need donors. I challenge you today to do whatever you can to help send a Green to Parliament!

Happy Labour Day weekend. I know I’ll be smiling all weekend long about this great news out of SGI!

Amidst some media specuation, the results of a party vote on resolutions has been announced*, and I’m excited to tell you today that the Green Party’s membership has green-lighted a resolution (3/4 in favour) that modernizes our constitution and changes the structure of the leadership term. Instead of allowing a four-year leadership term, come hell, high water, election, or other crisis, party members have decided that instead, the leader will be submitted to a review vote following a federal election. Also noteworthy is that Elizabeth May’s leadership received a solid endorsement, with 85% of members voting for resolution G10-D02, affirming that the party endorses May.

This is great news! This constitutional amendment addresses a number of serious political issues that have been of concern to Federal Council and party members for some time. When Council began to look into this issue, we quickly learned that Elections Canada rules around the financing of leadership campaigns would make it very difficult for a sitting leader to campaign for re-election while also running for Parliament. And obviously, there is the political stupidity of adhering to a rigid schedule for a leadership race in this age of minority governments, snap elections, Prime Ministers disregarding their own fixed-date election legislation, and so on. You can read a little more here about the problems we were faced with, and why we proposed this resolution as a solution.

To hold a leadership race for no good reason other than because four years have passed is something we realized that the Green Party, as we continue to gain support and professionalize, has outgrown. So I’m beyond excited today that the membership, in its infinite wisdom, has agreed with the changes Council suggested.

What does this mean? It’s simple. Within six months of a federal election, members will vote in a leadership review, and a contest will be held if less than 60% of members endorse the leader.

I should note that this change won’t be formally made to the constitution until after our August 20-22 convention, when the Party will ask members to formally ratify the changes. But given the strong support this motion received on the Bonser ballot, I don’t think that will be a problem.

There are still several motions that were yellow-lighted on the ballot, meaning that they will be debated, discussed and amended at the convention in workshops, and finally voted on by delegates at the BGM. I plan to do a post sometime this week about which motions we should be watching out for, and how I will be voting.

Before I leave, have you bought your ticket to the convention yet? Check out all the exciting events on the agenda! We are offering one-day tickets at a deep discount — only $100 for a single day, or $50 for students/seniors/unwaged. Get your ticket now, and join in on the voting, discussions and fun!

*This link will only work if you’re a member and login to the website.

Dear headline writers: I know you think you’re being quite witty when you come up with It’s not easy being Green, or It’s getting a little easier to be Green, or some variation thereof for an article about the Green Party. But you’re actually not. If I had been keeping a tally, I could probably point you to at least one major column per month with a similar headline.

It’s not that I have a particular problem with the idea that being Green isn’t easy, because it’s actually quite hard. Small parties like the Greens face a continual uphill climb thanks, primarily, Canada’s outdates first-past-the-post voting system. Check out a letter from Fair Vote Canada’s Executive Director Larry Gordon in yesterday’s Toronto Star for more info on this.

And as Barbara Yaffe explains in a column today, Greens in Europe have had representation for decades (oh how I envy their fair voting systems), and the UK elected its first Green MP under first-past-the-post this past spring. The Canadian Greens are employing a similar strategy to the one that elected UK Greens leader Caroline Lucas — we have identified our most promising riding, and we are focusing our effort and resources on electing an MP, Elizabeth May, in Saanich–Gulf Islands. The favourable news continually coming out of the riding makes it a little easier being Green.

Georges Laraque is also making being Green these days a little easier. As Jane Taber wrote in the Globe on the weekend, “Since becoming deputy leader, he has done about 20 interviews a day. Ms. May may be on to something.” Greens across the country are excited about our new deputy, and the reach he has. Not to die-hard politicos, and those who are already Green-friendly, but he has reach in communities that may have been turned away from politics by the shenanigans and dirty politics in Ottawa.

I could go on, but I have a trial today and I have to get to court. To sum up, it’s getting easier to be Green every year, and I can’t wait to elect an MP (or a few!) in the next election. And headline writers, you’re not wrong, but you need some new material.

Hey Green friends, this is a reminder that today is the last day to vote in a) Green Party council elections (I’m re-offering as a candidate for Ontario representative) and b) vote on policy/constitutional/directive resolutions.

It’s incredibly important that you VOTE – the deadline is today!!!

As many of you are aware, there has been some online discussion regarding several of the constitutional resolutions, specifically those related to the leadership term. The Federal Council, of which I am a member, has put forward a resolution that would replace the party’s inflexible, fixed-term leadership period with a leadership review following an election (G10-c29: Party Leader Term). This is obviously a wise move for a growing party. With Canadian politics in a state of constant flux, with an election possible virtually any time, it makes little sense to adhere to a fixed-term leadership model, where an election and a leadership could easily intersect, shattering any chance of the Greens gaining credibility with the Canadian public.

A Green for whom I have an immeasurable amount of respect, Katie Gibbs, has sent the following email to her contacts. I agree with her recommendations, so I’m reposting them here. Katie is former Co-Chair of the Young Greens Council, meaning that she has sat on Federal Council, and she is also the current CEO of the Ottawa-Vanier Greens. In this email she explains how she is voting, and I share her perspective. Many of you have asked how I wll vote on these leadership motions, so here is the list, followed by Katie’s email that explains the logic behind the recommendations.

Here’s the brief run-down, followed by the longer explanations.

G10-c12: Amendment to Bylaw 2.1.4.5 – Allow Extension to Leader’s Term – YES

G10-c29: Party Leader Term – YES

G10-d02: Leadership Endorsement 2010 – YES

G10-d11: Commitment to Leadership Race – NO

Hey everyone,

I’m sure many of you are aware that there are a few very important BGM resolutions pertaining to the leadership of our party.

The deadline to vote online is AUGUST 2nd. It is VERY important to vote online. Resolutions that receive over 60% support (green) online are automatically accepted and ones that have 60% disapproval (red) are automatically rejected and don’t come to the BGM at all.

G10-c12: Amendment to Bylaw 2.1.4.5 – Allow Extension to Leader’s Term

I get that you might be too busy to go through the ton of governance and policy resolutions, but here are the really important ones that need to be voted on. It will only take a few minutes to read them and vote.

The constitution currently calls for a leadership race every 4 years with no flexibility. This motion would allow a one-time extension to the 4 year term in case a general election is called close to the end of the leader’s term.

Right now this means that Elizabeth’s term could be extended until just after the next general election. I’m voting yes on this motion.

G10-c29: Party Leader Term

This motion actually changes the leader’s fixed four year term to system where we have a leadership review following each general election and if members do not pass a resolution endorsing the Leader by at least 60%, this will trigger a leadership contest. This motion is not compatible with G10-c12, but I am voting yes for both of them because they are both significantly better than the leadership contest section of our current constitution.

G10-d02: Leadership Endorsement 2010

Politically, it is a must for us to come out of the BGM rallied behind our leader. Even if you feel that she has made mistakes, we all need to vote yes on this motion.  If you want us to have any chance of winning a seat in the next election, vote yes for this directive and tell all your friends to as well. Personally, I couldn’t imagine a better leader than Elizabeth to lead us into the next election, I’m voting yes.

G10-d11: Commitment to Leadership Race

This motion directs the party to initiate a leadership race no later than October 2010. With the likeliness of a fall federal election, I think this motion equates to political suicide. We simply can’t have a leadership race during or immediately preceding a general election. Not only does it make us look like amateurs but new Elections Canada laws regarding leadership races would seriously restrict the amount of resources that we could offer to Elizabeth during a leadership race- not something we want to happen during a General Election. In case that wasn’t clear, I’m voting no on this directive.

Please take the time to vote on these important motions and then enjoy the long weekend!

Katie

CEO of the Ottawa-Vanier EDA
Former Co-Chair of the Young Greens of Canada

Finally, how do you vote? You will have received multiple emails over the summer with voting instructions, likely with the subject header “Time to E-Vote! Place au Cybervote!” Follow the instructions, and you should be in good shape. If you need help, write to helpdesk@everyonecounts.com or call 1‑877‑EVOTECA (1‑877‑386-8322).

Happy voting!

Look, I’m blogging again! I apologize for neglecting this blog throughout the last semester of law school and into the summer. I officially no longer had an excuse once exams were over at the end of April. But I’ve been meaning to get back into it, and this bit of exciting news prompted me to write today: NHL star Georges Laraque is the Green Party’s new deputy leader.

The Green Party constitution provides the leader with the ability to appoint up to two deputy leaders, and it has been a long tradition that one of those leaders be from Quebec. Laraque is an excellent fit for this position. His position as a high-profile former NHLer means he’s very well-known in Canada, but not for being a career politician. This means he is positioned very well to introduce the Greens to Canadians who might not already be engaged in politics. In my mind, this is exactly what political parties have to do to both stay relevant and help re-enfranchise the voters who have been turned away from politics and feel disempowered by our political and voting system, and the brand of dirty politics practiced by the old-line parties.

Laraque also represents green values. Like so many of us, he simply wants to make the world a better place, and he brings an enormous amount of energy to the issues he cares most about. This is what led him to become vegan and an advocate for protecting animals (yay! near and dear to my heart), to spearhead a project that raised over $1 million for Haiti, and so much more.

As Elizabeth May explained in the press release that announced his new position, “As Deputy Leader, Georges will help us realize our goal of promoting active, healthy, sustainable lifestyles as part of the Green agenda.” I’m pleased to hear that this is one of his policy priorities. Obesity is skyrocketing, and active, vegan living, of the variety embodied by Georges Laraque, is one piece of the solution.

I’m also excited for what his appointment means for the Green Party’s fortunes in Quebec. A number of my colleagues in the party have been working extremely hard to increase our profile and organization in la belle province, and the work is paying off. Our polling numbers in Quebec continue to rise, and being able to attract someone of the calibre of Georges Laraque means we’re doing something very right. Although Laraque won’t be running for a seat in the next election, he is the type of high-profile candidate, like Elizabeth May, who could realistically win a seat in the right riding.

Laraque replaces Jacques Rivard, who left the Greens to join the Bloc Quebecois earlier this year. I guess our lower-budget, grassroots, in-the-trenches approach to politics and organizing just couldn’t compare with the higher salary and expense account the Bloc could no doubt provide. But I think Georges Laraque’s selfless, caring, generous approach to politics, activism and life will be a much better fit with the Green Party, and I’m thrilled about what the future will bring for the Greens with Laraque as a deputy leader.

Not on Twitter, and not following the 2010 Toronto municipal race? Then you’re probably baffled by the title of this blog.

Over the past few months, chatter about Toronto’s municipal election has heated up, especially on Twitter — everyone’s favourite social media network. (Seriously, Facebook is over. Get on Twitter.) It was through Twitter that a group of engaged Torontonians first banded together, united by a conviction that the 2010 race should focus on the issues facing our city, and not simply the personalities of those in the horse race. (I think the mayoral drama of last week is a prime example of this misplaced focus.)

Under the name #voteTO, this group organized its first public event last week: #voteTOin416 — an urban issues forum featuring presentations from various community groups, or, as NOW Magazine put it, “an idea bonanza for civic nerds.” Each presenter was given a mere 4 minutes and 16 seconds to make the case for their issue as a ballot issue (hence the 416 reference). With the Annex Live venue packed to capacity with hundreds of eager Torontonians, speakers touched on topics as diverse as cycling, bed bugs, the stray cat problem, fair trade purchasing policies, and landlord licensing.

I carried the Fair Vote Canada flag with a presentation on the need to bring in proportional representation to Toronto elections. Democracy is in a pretty sad state in Toronto. We’re one of the most culturally diverse cities on this planet, yet 9 of 10 councilors are white, and 8 of 10 are men. Way too many of us will never get to elect anyone to city council, and the dismal voter turnout – 41% – reflects this disillusionment that I know many of us feel. You can watch my presentation above. Dave Meslin of Better Ballots also pitched the crowd on municipal voting reform. Judging by the audience response, the idea is a popular one.

Anyway, this “rock concert for city council junkies” was great, and given the venue was filled to capacity it sounds like there are plans to host more events in other areas of the city, and possibly a mayoral debate. To stay in touch, follow #voteTO on Twitter or join the #voteTO Facebook group.

Check out some media coverage of #voteTOin416 from the Toronto Star and NOW Toronto.

Finally, for those of you who are still wondering why the heck there is a # in #voteTO, it’s because the group’s name started off as a Twitter hashtag, something tweeters use to keep track of popular topics of discussion. Learn more about hashtags here!

Like the last few blogs I’ve written, this one will start with a mea culpa for being such a bad blogger. Law school has been way busier than last semester, and I think we’ll all just have to accept that I won’t be writing regularly until the year wraps up in April.

Today’s post is a welcome to the Green Party’s newest member: NHL star Georges Laraque!

I don’t tend to follow professional sports, so I the first time I heard of Georges Laraque was this spring when it came out that he had decided to go vegan and get involved in animal protection issues after watching the film Earthlings. Of course, this immediately put him in my good books! But the more I learned about him, the more impressed I became — particular with respect to his tremendous commitment to so many issues, like animal welfare, Haiti relief, mentoring youth, and so much more.

Given his strong devotion to these issues, it’s only natural that Georges Laraque has chosen to become more involved with the Green Party. No other political party recognizes that animals are sentient beings who have value in and of themselves, and who deserve our respect and consideration. No other party would end the commercial seal kill on Canada’s East Coast. No other party opposes trophy hunting. No other party has a plan to improve treatment for animals on farms, recognizing the need to move away from industrial, factory farming that is most abusive to animals.

I’m also thrilled about the many recent successes the Greens have seen in Quebec. Our new deputy leader, Jacques Rivard, a well-known former environmental journalist in la belle province, has been getting loads of publicity, and our polling numbers have been strong. Rivard is set to tour the province this spring, and the Greens will host lectures by prominent Green politicians from Europe.

Laraque announced his new team colours at a screening of Earthlings on Saturday, stating “I want to be part of a group that is working to build a society that is more just, more healthy, and more in harmony with the environment.” Georges, you’re in the right place: welcome to the Green Party!

I’m finally back! I was forced to take a blogging hiatus to deal with end-of-semester papers and exams, but I’m happy to report that business is now wrapped up, and I survived my first semester of law school relatively intact. It’s now time to catch up on hundreds of emails, do some holiday socializing, and write a few blog posts on the myriad of issues that are currently on my mind.

Here’s something that utterly infuriated me last night: DFAIT is looking to pay someone $100K to play around on Twitter, Flickr and YouTube to promote clubbing baby seals. This is from the job posting:

Social Media and Online Issues Management for the Seal Hunt

Organized opposition to the seal hunt has been increasing internationally since the Government of Canada announced a five-year management plan in 2006.

Well-organized anti-sealing groups are using digital communications to great advantage – effective use of search engine optimization (SEO) techniques, and leveraging Web 2.0 technologies and platforms to build communities of interest have dramatically increased their share of conversation and digital footprint. Tactics also include posting videos, images and other details (frequently incorrect or disingenuous) on platforms like YouTube and Flickr where sharing and viewership are maximized.

As a result, DFAIT would like to engage a firm to help meet described objectives attached herein.

Opposing the seal kill at Queen's Park last week

That’s right: $100K for some staffer at a rich PR firm to sit on a computer all day and post government lies and propaganda on various social media networks.

What’s most striking about this is that DFAIT spending has been slashed to the bone since the Conservative government seized power. They slashed $639 million from DFAIT’s budget over three years. Foreign service recruitment has been frozen, and staff at many Canadian embassies have been let go. Several foreign missions have been closed, and others have experienced 50% budget cuts. Many foreign policy experts are deeply worried about how an under-resourced DFAIT will possibly be able to help Canada effectively promote itself on the world stage, and export industries industries engaged in international trade are worried this neglect will leave all industries less able to market products abroad.

It is astounding that the Canadian government is not willing to provide even basic resources for some sectors of DFAIT, yet is eager to shell out six figures to promote the seal slaughter online through DFAIT. (Note that this is addition to the efforts of the DFO, which already makes a feeble attempt through YouTube and Twitter to prop up sealing.) Is there no conception of how damaging the seal kill is to Canada’s international image? As Tabatha Southey recently opined in the Globe, “Abroad, increasingly, Canada’s image is seal meat, asbestos and the oil sands.” She’s right. Our insistence on clubbing and shooting baby seals, blocking international climate agreements, and handing over Afghan detainees for torture has helped make a name for us on the international scene — very bad one. Gone are the days when Canadian travelers proudly displayed our flag on their backpacks.

It’s noteworthy that the job posting acknowledges people who care about animals are effective in getting the anti-sealing message out online. Yet the bulk of social media buzz about the seal truly is truly grassroots, and this is why the strategy of paying someone a hefty salary to tweet full-time about the benefits of slaughtering baby seals is doomed to fail. Regular people, including an overwhelming majority of Canadians, are opposed to the commercial seal kill and care enough about it to engage with others online. No amount of artificial social media organizing by the government will be able to counter the honest and organic concern of millions of people in Canada and around the world who oppose the barbaric slaughter.

On a final note, this job posting belies one of the government’s favourite talking points: that animal rights groups are soooo well funded that it’s just, like, so hard for the government to compete with them. As this posting demonstrates, it’s the government that has access to unlimited public coffers and is clearly not shy about using taxpayers’ dollars to prop up this tiny, outdated industry.

The government will undoubtedly continue to waste our money on these misguided efforts, but it is time to wake up and realize the seal kill is a losing game. The overwhelming negative global response to this shameful and bloody practice is why governments around the world are closing their borders to seal products. It’s time to transition sealers into sustainable industries, like coastal ecotourism, and relegate the seal kill to where it belongs — the history books.

“Climate change is mankind’s defining crisis, and demands a commensurate international response.”

This is the resolution that Green Party leader Elizabeth May and acclaimed British journalist George Monbiot will debate at tonight’s Munk Debate. The two will argue for a robust, global response to the climate crisis in order to halt out-of control global warming, against Bjorn Lomborg and Lord Nigel Lawson, who will oppose such an effort.

I’m beyond excited for this debate, and to be lucky enough to have a ticket to the sold-out live debate! I’ve been a huge fan of George Monbiot’s writing for years, and have no doubt that watching him share the stage with debater extraordinare Elizabeth May be unforgettable. I pity their opponents!

I’m hopeful this debate will help refocus attention on the Copenhagen climate meetings set to start later this week, where a successor to the Kyoto Protocol will be negotiated. Specifically, I hope debate will help get Canadians riled up about the shameful stance our country has taken by refusing to live up to our legally-binding greenhouse gas emission reduction targets, lying and obfuscating on the issue, and standing in the way of those who do care enough to act to preserve our collective future.

In his column yesterday, George Monbiot scathingly opined that Canada has become to climate change what Japan is to whaling. It hurts, but he’s right. We’re an international pariah on the issue. There’s a movement to dump us from the Commonwealth. No surprise, since our government’s stance on climate change contradicts the position taken by the rest of the Commonwealth at last weekend’s meetings, with Harper calling any chance of success in Copenhagen a “long shot”. This stands in stark contrast to the optimistic view expressed by other leaders, like Australia’s Kevin Rudd, and France’s Nicolas Sarkozy, who refuses to accept failure. Even Queen Elizabeth II has emphasized the importance of action.

George Monbiot considered tonight’s Munk Debate of such great importance that he has broken his self-imposed ban on air travel to be here in Canada tonight. Why? Because Canada’s continuing sabotage has consequences beyond our own borders. The Harper government strategy of blocking climate change negotiations sours the entire process. If we’re not going to lead the way in this fight, it’s time for Canada to get the hell out of the way.

If you want to tune in, it’s easy — the Munk Debate will be webcast live on the Green Party’s site. But for even more fun, why not meet up with friends and check out one of the live showings across the country? There are screenings set up at locations from coast-to-coast, and campus Green clubs will have a strong presence.

This should be one great debate!