Elephants in the (Back) Room

Bruce Anderson

Strategic consultant Bruce Anderson writes about contemporary politics and broader social trends.

July 3, 2009

By my count, there are at least two massive and potentially very contentious issues that will affect the health and sense of well being of millions of Canadians over the next decade, but little evidence that they will be coming to a political stage near you soon.

Health care and retirement income are looming mega issues, but they enjoy elephant in the room status most of the time; we feel safer looking away from them until there is absolutely no choice. And who knows when that day will come.

Watching President Obama crusade for his health reform package in a Town Hall meeting this week left me feeling unsure about how his effort will turn out, but admiring his determination to face the issue squarely, and to reposition the debate to fit with the times.

His pitch to Republicans is cleverly tailored: if you donít like the deficits and debt, health reform is the way out. Campaign ads note that while some want nationalization and others say do nothing, the Presidentís health package is a Goldilocks solution. In so doing, he acknowledges that the idea of government health care was out there, but it 's not his.

Here in Canada, many voters have concluded that our health care system, if not broken now, will collapse under several strains in the not too distant future. As the population ages, too many people will experience too much disappointment, and the conviction will grow that we donít have the best available health care, we have the best that can be affordably provided to everyone.

When it comes to life preserving health care, Canadians will abide government being unable to provide everything to everyone, but they will not tolerate being prevented from gaining access to better health service using the ir own means, if they can afford better. And most will eventually balk at the hypocrisy of extolling the virtues of our system over Americaís, even as a growing number of our people find it necessary to seek care south of 49. In short, itís only a matter of time before our political leaders choose to or are forced to find better solutions, to embrace more fundamental change much more aggressively.

It 's also pretty clear that we will have a crisis in the area of pensions and retirement income. Millions of people are heading towards what they hope will be a happy retirement, but the numbers suggest it will be a financial wall they hit instead. The solutions can cause political trauma now, or later, but there is virtually no chance to avoid conflict at some point in time. If one massive generation saddle s the rest of society with climbing costs, if those with public pensions are secure while those in private systems are forced to reduce their lifestyles, if expectations about wealth transfer are dashed because of basic cost of living considerations, we will need new ideas and new ways to talk about these issues , and new policy as well.

With health and pension reform, there will be political winners and losers. Often in the past, losers have been those who tried to tackle hot issues, and were scalded. Winners were those who stood back and attacked initiative, finding its weakest point and decrying change, while not necessarily offering an alternative.

This may continue to be the pattern for some time, but not forever.

At some point the craving for solutions will become too strong, and the leader who presents powerful new ideas with persuasive skill, has a chance to create massive and longstanding competitive advantage for their party.


Commentary by the Ottawa Mens Centre in the Globe and Mail



7/4/2009 11:29:28 AM
It's nice to see Bruce Anderson bringing to the stage the real substantive issues that face Canadians.

Our political parties have obviously been informed of these problems and choose not to take any action because it will not win them immediate political points that count in the near term for popularity that means a short sighted goal of just winning the next election or staying in power by avoiding an election.

The number one issue in Canada is the declining birth rate and its any easy fix, that all parties should agree to, that is, Canada needs more children to reverse the decline in the birth rate.

That means, a Legal Presumption of Equal Parenting, equitable child support guidelines , A Judicial authority with real teeth run by people who are Not judges and psychological screening of judicial applicants to get rid of the present den of criminals who are engaged in a war against men.

Ontario has as its most festering legal cancer, an underbelly of the judiciary that engage in the most flagrant abuses of power that is beyond the comprehension of the average person.

The Judiciary starts its selection process on those who are potentially the most corrupt who will make political decisions rather than legal decisions, the very worst get to be judges at the Ontario Court of Appeal and its well known that the most Anti-Male Judge is the Madam of the Ontario Court of Appeal, Katherine Feldman.

The previous judges who held the record for the Most Anti-male , the highest index of discrimination against judges all graduated to the Supreme Court of Canada.

Canada is a country that rewards the very worst criminals in society by making them judges where they spend their entire criminal careers flagrantly abusing their absolute power and leaving a trail of destruction that is beyond the comprehension of the average Canadian until it happens to them.

You could be next.




Sorry Typo - should read -
The previous judges (of the Ontario Court of Appeal) who held the record for the Most Anti-male , the highest index of discrimination against Men (Fathers) graduated to the Supreme Court of Canada.

A country's future, its future prosperity depends upon the Rule of Law, and it is very obviously contrary to the national interest to have a judiciary that undermines the Rule of Law and uses as its foundation, political reasoning that is dressed up and doctored to look like a legal decision.

That unfortunately is an accurate description of the underbelly of the judiciary.

The most outspoken are also the most corrupt, and willing to make the most obvious political decisions with an arrogance that tops of scales of conceit and criminality.

The very worst of the worst, can be found in Ottawa, at 161 Elgin Street. The two worst are Judge Allan Sheffield who makes criminal convictions without a trial by "private arrangement" ie, "summary judgment". Judge Denis Power has an anger management problem, a contempt for anyone who utters any criticism of the judiciary and together with Sheffield make a substantial amount of the Judiciary's draconian political decisions that often result in a father never seeing their children again or indefinite jail sentences for life while never having had a trial or even a right to a full answer and defense.

Parental Alienation is well known as being more harmful than childhood sexual abuse. The worst abuse against children is done by those with the power and the most amount of "power" is held by judges and some of whom intentionally abuse that power entrusted to them by their judicial appointment.

That makes the Dis-Honourable Justice Allan Sheffield and the Dis-Honourable Denis Power two of Canada's worst child abusers. They are two of Canada's worst criminals and they are not in jail, they are the "underbelly" of the Ontario Superior Family Court.