It is peak season for US politics. We non-Americans watch entranced and disgusted by the search for shadows that are bound to lurk in the hearts of Presidential opponents, as they do in each of us. Hubris takes no prisoners as it fractures into partisan flags flying from solitary peaks. There must be no spaces in between, no middle ground in American democracy today. Being forsaken isn’t pretty.
The early settlers weren’t blown here on gusts of hope. They were more pragmatic and gritty. Cradled in the riches of North America their nightmares gave way with opportunity, cooperation, and hard work. You could be unrealistic in America and still make something of your dreams. Somehow over two centuries such bounty got confused with hope and hope got confused with destiny.
You can’t be forever blest. Such certainty is bound to scorch, first in the lengthening shadow you cast and eventually in the heart that holds it. This is really what’s on display in American politics today - one last speculation on hope. But that will pass. Hope has evaporated from other peoples. From them Americans will discover more fundamental aspects of their character - courage, love, humility, resilience, reciprocity, trust, perseverance and yes, faith.
Hope isn’t audacious. Courage is. Without it no other virtue is possible. It takes courage to confront your contradictions and wrong doings; to love opponents; to be curious about strangers; and to carry on even when driven to your knees.
Emily Dickinson used a bird metaphor to define hope as “the thing with feathers that perches in the soul.” But redemption does not have wings. Feathers are too light for the work ahead. The outlook may be bleak but many Americans are awakening to life in the spaces in between. They are not waiting as Emily Dickinson did for hope “to sing the tune.” They are rediscovering their faith in each other. These include truth-tellers like Angeles Arrien who nourishes with ancient wisdom, John McKnight and Peter Block who illuminate with neighbourly love and Bill Drayton who inspires a marriage between creativity and empathy.
Americans have long working days ahead. Those of us who love them should remind them they are not alone.
NOTE:
This piece was inspired by Paul Simon’s 1973 song An
American Tune, which was in turn inspired by a JS Bach melody.
Gregor Wolbring is the purest, cheekiest and most prolific commentator I know on issues affecting people with disabilities. Perhaps it's his European origins blended with his Albertan sensibilities as Associate Professor, Faculty of Medicine, University of Calgary. He does not appear to be constrained by the usual nuances of language or moral righteousness exhibited by many advocates. He calls the issues as he experiences them himself and is smart enough to understand the implications and dangerous side effects of society's mad dance with medical, scientific, nano-technological and genetic advances. He is far too worried for cheap shots.
Gregor has landed a new gig, writing for The Conversation (Academic Rigour, Journalistic Flair) on the Paralympic Games. His first post Expectations for the Paralympics provides a sobering contrast between expectations for the Games by the mainstream British public and those of folks with disabiities and their families. Here are some excerpts:
Since the Emergency Budget two years ago, disabled people and
their carers have seen a drop in income of £500 million. This is one of
the disturbing findings of Destination Unknown
a report by the think tank Demos outlining the impact not just on
people with disabilities but equally their families. Households in the
study are becoming more socially isolated, and
reducing the amount of activities they engage in – from essentials such
as work and medical appointments to perceived ‘luxuries’ such as
volunteering and training. This is at odds with the Government’s vision
of stronger and active communities.
50% of the British public see the Games to empower disabled people but only 23% of disabled people think like that.
4% of the British public think the games make disabled people feel like
second class people versus 20% of disabled people who voice that
sentiment.
A SCOPE news release states further that, “Between April and September this
year (2011) the number of disabled people claiming they experienced aggression,
hostility or name calling saw a dramatic hike from 41% to 66%.”
Artificial legs are often hailed as “liberation tools," giving their
wearers the “essential” ability to walk. At the same time, other
therapeutic assistive devices, such as wheelchairs, are demonised
through the use of phrases such as “wheelchair-bound” or “confined to
the wheelchair”.
In 2003 I wrote a book chapter called “Confined to your legs” to question
the leg-ism evident in the discourse around artificial limbs and in
society in general. And the bias against wheelchairs has been questioned by people with disabilities for a long time.
...the media is fast to use terms such as “inspiring” with Paralympians.
But how can they inspire if the reporting of disabled people often
continues to be disabling in so many instances.
Instead of using labels such as “wheelchair-bound” the media should
aspire to inspire people to accept and support ability differences.
Gregor's is committed to shifting the eye of the beholder from deviancy to dignity. In an age when more and more of us are caught in the needs maker's grasp his value is priceless.
The impact was dramatic. First we lost all our government funding as part of an omnibus bill within a massive restraint program. Then we were obliged to submit to a long onerous and time consuming Income Tax audit. The third was revealed a few years later – a Cabinet Memo had been circulated to politicans and senior public servants warning them not to meet with our organization – that I was a trouble maker and not to be trusted.
All were tough blows for a small non - profit advocacy group intent on closing institutions for people with mental handicaps in British Columbia and ending their inhuman, segregated treatment.
All this happened in the early 1980’s.
Today June 4th most major environmental organizations are shutting down their websites. Others will follow suit in sympathy. The campaign is called BlackOutSpeakOut. Their aim – to draw attention to a Federal omnibus budget bill which weakens environmental protections as well as the deliberate attempt by the Federal Government to classify environmental activists as terrorists.
It’s unclear to me what will be served by shutting down a host of websites. Seems to me that's exactly what the federal governmnet would like. There may be a secret martial art move I’m not aware of. Certainly the groups involved are some of the most creative and successful environmental activists on the planet.
Our recovery thirty years ago made us tougher – tougher in our advocacy – tougher in our fund raising. My roots as a social entrepreneur began there.
We also grew prouder. Prouder of our self sufficiency. Prouder of our ability to speak without fear of consequences. Prouder of the solutions we were able to introduce and implement including for example the Registered Disability Savings Plan.
I’m convinced the key reasons British Columbia became the first and for a long time the only large Canadian province to close its three big institutions was our independently financed advocacy and self sufficiency mindset.
Effective public policy advocacy can only be produced by non government funded organizations.
I have three wishes for the post June 4th blackout:
an acceleration of support by Canadians for our canaries in the mine – environmental groups willing to debate and discuss critical environmental policy issues.
other advocacy and policy organizations in Canada end their dependence on government funding and develop an independently funded public policy advocacy strategy
social and environmental organizations join together to usher in a renaissance of solution based public policy making in Canada.
We are facing tough, complex social and environmental challenges. Their resolution will not happen without strong citizen based organizations speaking without fear of consequence.
there are more First Nations youth in government care today than at the height of the residential school travesty in Canada
funding for on -reserve schools is 25 per cent less than funding for public schools and
only 40 per cent of first nations students on reserve graduate.
Something should be done about this. Somebody should do something.
In fact there is and they are. This past week Cindy Blackstock, the First Nations Child and Family Caring Society (FNCFCS) and the assembly of First Nations enjoyed a major legal victory. On April 18th the Federal Court overturned a ruling of the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal which had dismissed their complaint without hearing any arguments. FNCFCS alleges that the Government of Canada is discriminating against First Nations children by underfunding child welfare services. The recent ruling paves the way for a new Human Rights Tribunal hearing before a newly constituted panel of adjudicators.
Not only has our federal government been actively opposing the court case and original human rights complaint but also, has placed Cindy under surveillance. In November of 2011 it came to light that officials from the Department of Aboriginal Affairs are tailing her, showing up at more than 70 of her speeches and appearances, taking notes, following her Facebook page and sharing what they find with the Department of Justice. (source CBC)
There are many social policy issues that have defied solutions over decades. Support for First Nations people is certainly one of them. No government can lay claim to solutions and few service providers inside or outside First Nations would claim omnipotence. We are faced with a tough stubborn challenge that has resisted everyone's best and meagre efforts. For example, when Sheila Fraser retired as Canada's Auditor General she wrote:
I find it really tragic that after ten years, over thirty audits of first nations issues on reserves, a fair bit of money and hard work by public servants, conditions are worse today than ten years ago... We can’t keep doing things the same way. Obviously it’s just not working.
There are two pre-conditions for solving tough problems.
The first is to improve how we work together. Any solution no matter how innovative must be implemented within an eco-system of players comprising friends, allies, opponents and strangers. If there is no capacity to work together the best and worst solutions will be undermined. And we will get a repeat of past failed efforts. Court cases, human rights tribunals, personal surveillance are not conducive to creating this enabling environment, to nurturing trust and respect.
The second is for organizations, agencies and advocates to admit they are flummoxed, baffled and desperate - that they don't know the solutions or indeed how to arrive at them - that, as Sheila Fraser stated, - it's obviously not working. This move from hubris to humility opens up the possibility for rethinking the problem, for re framing the solutions, for exploring ideas you might otherwise reject, for taking risks, for entertaining new approaches. Businesses do this naturally. They have to constantly rethink their business model. They call it R&D. Otherwise they will go out of business - think Kodak, or video stores. Before innovative solutions (business or social) can be introduced it is essential to put aside your claims of omnipotence and at least admit you don't have all the answers. This is tough for many of us but particularly for our governments who are assailed on all sides with criticism. Their protective shell is quite thick.
There may be some satisfaction in getting your case before the Human Rights Tribunal again but I suspect Cindy and other advocates, inside and outside government, would rather get on with the tougher job of finding and implementing solutions. I look forward to the day when politicians, public servants, First Nations, Aboriginal, Metis, funders and advocates can put down their legal tools and work differently together.
NOTE: Vancouver residents can see Cindy speak this Tuesday April 24th at the Central Library, 350 West Georgia, Alice McKay Room - 7:00 - 8:30
"The physical design of cities and their economic functions are secondary to their relationship to the natural environment and to the spiritual values of human community." Lewis Mumford
Half the world's population of 7 billion live in cities. Another 2 billion are expected to become city dwellers by 2030. Urban life is a fact of life for most of us.
Canada itself has become an urban nation, to borrow a phrase from Alan Broadbent, with almost 80% of our population living in cities. Cities today have complex infrastructure and social needs yet they are governed by rules established at Confederation when Canada was rural. Their revenue sources are restricted to property taxes and fees, and they are entirely dependent on provincial governments for permission to do anything new in any field of activity.
That's too bad. While cities may not have much power, many of the social, environmental and financial challenges of the 21st century reside in cities. And so do the solutions. Poverty, social isolation, reliance on fossil fuels, food security, cultural expression and economic growth all end up on the desks of City Councils - certainly as moral responsibilities if not statutory and legislative.
Fortunately cities are containers of creativity and they continuously push boundaries, innovate and pioneer solutions. The Four Pillars Drug Strategy is one of numerous examples.
On February 1st and 2nd, 2012 Vancouver will host The Cities Summit. They will assemble international business and urban leaders to design the creative, practical solutions for a sustainable urban future. Topics include cities as engines of research and innovation; going digital; cities supporting early stage innovation and investing in urban infrastructure.
I have two concerns. One is the absence of a stream related to social innovation. Since the agenda is still under construction I'm hopeful this will be remedied. The other is lack of scholarships to ensure social entrepreneurs who are creating jobs, bringing investments and solving tough social and environmental challenges can attend.
As for the 2012 TED prize - this year it is being awarded to the City 2.0. Where, what and who is a mystery. Here are the criteria.
The City 2.0 is not a sterile utopian dream, but a real-world upgrade tapping into humanity’s collective wisdom.
The City 2.0 promotes innovation, education, culture, and economic opportunity.
The City 2.0 reduces the carbon footprint of its occupants, facilitates smaller families, and eases the environmental pressure on the world’s rural areas.
The City 2.0 is a place of beauty, wonder, excitement, inclusion, diversity, life.
Looks like Vancouver is getting a head start on its application!
Note:
The painting is La Citta Ideale by either one of two Renaissance artists Pierro della Francesca or Luciano Laurano.
"Democratic governance must evolve rapidly if it is to guide us through our social and environmental challenges. We require a deeper, more integrated form of democracy." John Richardson Founder Party 'X'
The lingering memory of a recent Paul Hawken speech was the delivery of a comment from the audience. Stepping back from the mike a representative of Occupy Vancouver proceeded to speak in a manner that would have satisfied the classical elocution teachers of the past. She would pause enabling those close to her to repeat and amplify her remarks. This chorus of course enabled the rest of us to hear what she was saying and the speaker perhaps to gather her thoughts.
What interests me the most about the Occupy movements is their attention to doing democracy differently. No one is in charge. All voices are welcome. Decision making is patient. Everyone is engaged. Everyone is responsible. Everyone is capable.
This move to participatory democracy started before Occupy, was lifted by Occupy and will continue whether Occupy does or not. Sure it's not perfect - there will be mistakes and diversions. I'm grateful my own miscues of youthful protest exuberance weren't magnified in a media spotlight.
John Richardson opened my eyes to the intentional manner in which democratic principles are being rescued by a new generation of activists. They know having the 'right' analysis and solutions isn't enough. They seek new ways of working together, across differences, past hurts, competing solutions and either/or mentality.
John no stranger to reinvention. He transformed the concept of a legal clinic when he founded Pivot Legal Society. Pivot understands the root causes of poverty and social exclusion will not be extinguished by the law alone. They use the full creative force of the law to address violence against women, police brutality, the rights of sex workers; and the criminalization of addiction. Equally Pivot worked just as thoroughly to address cultural attitudes and beliefs that undermine marginalization and inequity.
But that's in the past. After 10 years, an extended silent retreat, John is applying his considerable skills and passion to PartyX. He is not satisfied our current decision making processes are adequate for the task of addressing our complex environmental and social challenges.
Here is PartyX's intention:
Today, representative democracy is our best solution to the challenge of collective decision-making – but current models suffer from significant shortcomings. Invented hundreds of years ago, they disconnect all but small group of politicians from meaningful decisions.
What about the distributed intelligence of the whole community? What is the potential of the internet to raise the level of collective engagement and dialogue, and respond more effectively to the increasingly complex problems facing society?
Party X's vision is the emergence of a new form of democratic governance through developments in multi-party decision-making software, and from the spread of those applications to all facets of society.
The latest initiative of John and PartyX is a 1 day 'un conversation' they will be hosting with Changecamp on November 26th at the HiVE in Vancouver. Register here.
Their focus - the decision-making challenges faced by the Occupy movement, with implications for grassroots organizing generally. Their plan is to convene a working group out of this meeting that can work with tech groups in other Occupy cities to create a mobile-based decision platform.
If you are not in Vancouver stay tuned. Their efforts are bound to ricochet around the world like so many other awakenings in 2011 - Egypt, Arab Spring, Occupy. These may be the early stages of a world wide movement - one enabled by social media and smart, thoughtful democrats like John Richardson.
15 year old Shannen Koostachin of Attawapiskat First Nation in Ontario had a dream - to go to a real school. A school that was safe and comfy, offering culturally based education for herself and her classmates. She led a group of students from her remote James Bay community to Ottawa to ask why the government had broken its promise to build a new school in Attawapiskat. Their school was a makeshift portable on school grounds contaminated by diesel oil.
Shawn Atleo the British Columbia born chief of the Assembly of First Nations was in diapers when a major 1967 report concluded that aboriginal children were not succeeding in Canada's educational system. There have been numerous reports since including a Royal Commission in 1996 which reached the same conclusion.
Sheila Fraser probably the most trusted public servant in the country delivered a parting challenge to Canada in May of 2011 after ending a ten year career as Canada's Auditor General.
I find it really tragic that after ten years, over thirty audits of first nations issues on reserves, a fair bit of money and hard work by public servants, conditions are worse today than ten years ago… We can’t keep doing things the same way. Obviously it’s just not working.
The job of closing the gap between living conditions on reserves and the rest of the country remains undone despite the best efforts of many people and an awful lot of money.
Something has to change. We can't keep doing what we've always done. Into the gap has stepped a group of leading Canadian Foundations supported by an impressive network of agencies, advocacy groups and resources. They wouldn't describe it this way but I will - they've decided to look beyond the people in charge. These, after all, are prisoners of the paradigm that caused the crisis in the first place or have failed to fix it. The foundations including McConnell, Donner, Vancouver Foundation, Lawson, RBC and Paul Martin's Aboriginal Education Initiative took to heart Einstein's observation that: “Complex problems cannot be solved at the level of awareness that created them.”
They are searching for your big ideas to assist First Nations, Métis and Inuit learners succeed in the classroom and beyond. It can be specific to aboriginal people or it can be adapted from elsewhere. Initiated and managed by Ashoka Canada and using their Changemakers collaborative web platform they have launched Inspiring Approaches to First Nations, Métis and Inuit Learning.
They don't want business as usual. They don't want to reinvent the wheel. They don't want to throw more money at an inefficient system. They want fresh thinking.
Since 2001 the number of aboriginal people entering the work force has increased by 25% and is more than four times the rate for other Canadians Too many are ill equipped with the basic skills for particpation.
The 2006 Census shows 43% of aboriginals aged 25 to 64 and living on reserve have not achieved the minimum educational standards required to participate in our knowledge based economy. This contrasts with 88% of mainstream society having at least high school graduation.
The sponsors have created an array of awards for regional, national and international and submissions as well as awards for specific areas of learning.
Early Entry Deadline is December 7th, 2011
Final Deadline is January 29, 2012
On line voting will take place between March 7th and 21st and
Winners will be announced on March 26th. For more details click here.
Alas the solutions will come too late for Shannen Koostachin. She died in a car accident in May of 2010 but the campaign, Shannen's Dream carries on thanks to the First Nations Caring society and the indefatigable Cindy Blackstock.
Simone Weil the French mystic, philosopher and social activist wrote, "Intelligence is enlightened by love." So is legislation.
After a nearly 25 year journey the British Columbia government recently affirmed the status of Representation Agreements, a grass roots alternative to formal adult guardianship. This ends numerous attempts to claw back its usefulness.
Rep Agreements are unique to B.C. as far as I know - the result of a community based coalition formed in the eighties that attracted advocates, health care professionals, administrators, lawyers, public servants and concerned citizens.
Rep Agreements enable you to choose whom you want to support you make decisions as a result of illness, injury or disability. Everyone can use them including people who traditionally are assumed not to have legal 'capacity.' And that's the breakthrough. Typically people with presumed intellectual incapacity have been excluded from using personal planning tools like powers of attorney, advance directives, living wills or consent to health care.
The pioneering aspect of the Representation Agreement Act is its enlightened approach to this legal concept of 'capacity.'
For the first time anywhere, relationships characterized by trust are legitimized in statute as a key criterion in determining capacity. The law has finally caught up with what we have always known - relationships are the key to safety, security and a good life. In effect this B.C. law recognizes social intelligence.
Rep Agreements enable people who traditionally would be deemed incompetent, to determine who they want to support them make decisions. This includes many seniors, people with disabilities, brain injuries or mental illness. To date over 5,000 Rep Agreements have been registered with Nidus and likely a similar number have been created independently. Certainly most of PLAN's lifetime members have created one.
And that's the point, Rep Agreements are a low cost, legally enforceable tool which validates the caring and support provided by friends, families and network members.
The organizational legacy of the coalition is the Nidus Personal Planning Resource Centre and Registry. Nidus is celebrating the consolidation of Rep Agreements as a permanent personal planning tool during September. Visit their celebration website here.
Here is the contribution I wrote for their celebration:
The creation of the Representation Agreement is a powerful example of citizens taking action to improve how we take care of each other. Like all creative acts it started with a simple but transformational insight. We are kept safest, our choices are respected and our life has meaning, texture and pizzazz in the company of family and friends. In most circumstances we don't need a costly professional system. We need each other. That was the driving force behind the grass roots coalition that invented and ushered Representation Agreements into existence. That is also the driving force behind those of us who have Rep Agreements or who have become representatives. Imagine this. Enshrined, indeed shining in British Columbia law for the first time anywhere in the world, a declaration that trust and caring relationships are critical to sound decision making. There is more to legal competence and good decision making than IQ. There is our natural commitment to each other. Inspired by love, Representation Agreements offer something extraordinary - they are a practical grass roots alternative to formal guardianship. They are also symbolic of our capacity to care for each other. In our modern world they remind us that we have each other, that we rely on each other, that we care for each other. Three cheers for the citizens, grass roots advocates, allies, professionals, public who made Rep Agreements possible.
Note: The custodian of the Rep Agreement vision and the curator of its potential is Joanne Taylor, Executive Director of Nidus. Joanne has devoted a large chunk of her life to spreading the word about Rep Agreements and assisting with timely information and advice. Joanne works tirelessly and without fanfare.
She is indeed a labourer of love. Simone Weil had people like her in mind.
The central characteristic of most advocacy is to get the right proposition in front of government and to lobby for its acceptance and implementation. However even when a commitment to action is secured there is often a failure to implement. It has dawned on many of us there are other forces at play.
In fact I am now of the opinion governments are experiencing a certain paralysis. Their challenges are accelerating, becoming more complex and more furious. It's not that there aren't visionary, talented and creative politicians and public servants. There are. However the environment and context for 'doing' good public policy has shifted in the 21st century without a corresponding adjustment. The 'tools' of public policy are simply outdated.
The best summary of the forces driving the need for innovation inside government along with the corresponding reasons why it hasn't happened is contained in Christian Bason's book, Leading Public Sector Innovation: Co-creating for a Better Society. Christian has appeared in these blog-essays (bl-essays) many times. He is Director of the Danish Mindlab - with a mandate to achieve citizen centred innovation in collaboration with business and the community.
To sum up these driving forces embody a double challenge between adaptations to (planned, internal) on-going public sector reform on the one hand, and (emergent, external) turbulent socioeconomic driving forces on the other hand.
Unfortunately, most public sector organisations today are ill-suited to develop the kinds of radical new solutions that are needed. The rate of change and the turbulent environment dramatically increase the risk that public organisations lose even more of their touch with the enterprises and citizens they are meant to serve. Research from, amongst others, the US, the UK and Denmark show that most modern public organisations’ innovation capabilities are focused on internal administrative processes, rather than on generating new services and improved results for society.
Christian then lists seven barriers to public sector innovation which include: Paying a Price for Politics; Anti-Innovation DNA; Fear of Divergence; Where's the Citizen?; An Orchestra without a Conductor; the Scaling Problem; and the 80/20 Rule.
... evaluation has become such a prevalent tool in the public sector that it risks overshadowing the need for faster, more experimental, forward-looking problem-solving. When it comes to their development efforts, public sector organisations seem to spend 80 percent of their energies on understanding the past and (at best) managing the present, and perhaps only 20 percent of their efforts on systematically exploring future directions for better policies and services.
Christian's book and his continuing work at Mindlab doesn't stop at critique. He offers an abundance of solutions emerging globally. However, reading his essay reminds me to look with softer eyes at those who are dealing with the challenges our governments face and to reach out to our many allies inside government who recognize and are doing something about them. Their assumption is they can't do it alone. Neither can we.
I wasn't able to make the Public Policy Forum's annual testimonial dinner on April 28th when André Picard, the Globe and Mail's Health Reporter received the Hy Solomon Award. However, those who attended were unanimous - his short acceptance speech was brilliant. Here it is, with André's permission.
The Five Mantras of Healthcare Reform
The fine folks from the Public Policy Forum have asked me to say a few words on my pet topic - Canada’s health system. But they have said I have to keep it under five minutes.
So, in the 300 seconds I have, I would like to share five mantras for healthcare reform.
(Mantra is a Sanskrit word meaning “instrument for thinking.” Mantras are short phrases designed to focus the mind - and, Lord knows, we could use some focusing of the mind in the health field.)
Mantra #1. Medicine is the easy part of healthcare
It’s just plumbing with more expensive tools. We need to invest in things that will make the population healthy - education, housing, the environment, community building, meaningful work.
And when people are sick or wounded or demented or disabled, we need to get our priorities straight: Hold their hands, listen to them, comfort them, help them navigate the care journey, and help them remain members of their community.
And, of course, we need to continue to do good plumbing.
Mantra #2. The law is an ass
We must stop hiding behind the Constitution in such a cowardly fashion. Health is not a provincial responsibility, nor a federal responsibility; it should a universal goal and a fundamental right.
In the provision of healthcare, we need to be guided by values, not shackled by anachronistic laws fashioned in - and for - another time.
Mantra #3. To quote the legendary economist John Kenneth Galbraith: “If you don’t count it, it doesn’t count.”
We need concrete health goals, to be guided by evidence, to measure results, and to reward success.
To do so, we need to invest in technology; we need to make a culture of safety a priority; we need to embrace innovation, and; we must make patient-centered care a mission, not merely a public relations catchphrase.
Mantra #4. You can’t deliver 21st century care with a 1950s system.
Our health system was designed for the delivery of episodic acute care by physicians, principally in hospitals. The reality today is that most patients have multiple chronic conditions and they can be treated in the community.
We need to fundamentally re-shape the system to reflect their needs. That means an emphasis on primary care, on team-based care delivery and creating a continuum of care.
Our ultimate goal: A good life and a good death.
Mantra #5. Stop whining. Start doing.
The poet Shelley said of his mother-in-law: “She has lost the power of communication but, sadly, not the power of speech.”
That describes well my feelings about far too many our elected officials, business titans and community leaders and my frustration with their seeming inability to articulate a vision for healthcare.
The lobbing of rhetorical hand grenades like “unsustainable,” “out-of-control spending,” and “an aging population that will bankrupt us” is tiresome and counter-productive - not to mention that these Chicken-Little-like warnings are fallacious.
Leadership is about finding solutions, not embracing failure. Make the system work, don’t assume it is unworkable.
Have we lost sight of the raison d’être for medicare? It’s just, it’s fair, it’s efficient, and it’s cost-effective.
We can have these social and economic advantages and be financially responsible.
Leadership means not only articulating these values but giving them life.
No, medicare cannot be all things to all people. For me, the starting point is defining what medicare should cover - and not cover - in the 21st century.
To be deserving of the title “leader” you have stop whining and start acting.
If I have spoken for too long, I apologize. But I hope my comments have been stimulating and maybe even discomfiting.
In conclusion, I want to thank you again for bestowing this great honour, the Hy Solomon Award.
It falls in the category of lifetime achievement award, but I want to serve notice tonight that I’m not dead yet: I plan to be around a lot longer.
I also plan to become increasingly cantankerous and obnoxious on behalf of the Canadian public, which is demanding that our leaders embrace and implement healthcare reform.
As Martin Luther King Jr. said: “Our lives begin to end the day we remain silent about things that matter.”
Healthcare matters. We owe it to ourselves to get it right.
