Sunday, September 22, 2013

Sarnia Mayor Bradley Claims Victory?

Sarnia Mayor Bradley Claims Victory? Anti-Nuclear groups, whether it is in relation to initiatives such as new build, DGR, relicensing or the transportation of the steam generators from Bruce Power all get headlines by heaping a cast of inaccuracies into the public arena or exploiting one piece of a story at the exclusion of other parts of the story for the express purpose of neglecting information that would ensure proper context. Aligning with one of these groups is simple and easy; it requires little effort and often grabs cheap political points and to this end one has to give Mayor Bradley credit for hooking his wagon to this easy target. The facts of the proposed shipment do not bear out the negative publicity about shipping the steam generators. Approximately 90 per cent of the metal in the steam generators can be decontaminated, melted down and safely reused. The rest would have to be returned to the Bruce Power site for long-term storage. Each steam generator contains 100 tonnes of steel but less than four grams of radioactive substances. Perhaps putting some context to this statement is valuable. Smoke detectors in countless homes contain a source of ionizing radiation. It is generally Americium 241 and weighs about 0.5 grams. The shipment is made up of 16 steam generators with each steam generator containing approximately 4 grams of low level radioactive substances. The total radiation in the shipment is about 64 grams or the aggregate radiation of about 130 smoke detectors. In other words the sum would be equivalent to the radiation found in a block or two of homes equipped with smoke detectors. Knowing these facts is crucial if the debate is to remain reasonable. Instead publicity from the anti-nuclear side would have people believe that the shipment is some overwhelming shipment of nuclear waste when in reality it is an extremely low level shipment steeped in the long history of the nuclear industry in judicious and regulated of storage of waste, fuel, etc. When this shipment is targeted by politicians it is always clear that it is aimed at political outcomes or the same effort and indignation would be applied to each and every shipment of toxic material on the lakes and on the road each and every day on a 24 hour basis. Claiming a victory; if Mayor Bradley of Sarnia is claiming a victory in the battle for cheap political points, then well done! He has garnered no points as an educated and thoughtful politician in relation to this issue. Dave Trumble Kincardine

A Reply to the letter Ontario’s Debt Clock-September 5, 2013

A Reply to the letter Ontario’s Debt Clock-September 5, 2013 Dear Editor; In reading the letter the reader needs to be constantly aware that the Canadian Taxpayer’s Federation (CTF) is a staunchly right wing organization and not significantly different than other organizations such as the Fraser Institute and the conservative governments throughout Canada that hide their true agenda behind their battle cry of lower taxes. Perhaps not all, but I am yet to come across an organization on the right of the political spectrum that has any understanding or appreciation of history. An example within the letter is the author’s mention of green energy. The fact that the green energy act is stupendously flawed is not at issue. It is not surprising that a conservative group such as the CTF fails to mention that the green energy act could only have been spawned where public power in public hands no longer exists. The destruction of public power in public hands is laid squarely on the shoulders of the conservatives of Mike Harris despite the fact that McGuinty and Wynne have done nothing to repair the damage. Speaking of history I see the CTF takes aim at Unions. Having such groups take aim at unions is such a regular part of their repertoire that it is almost now cliché. Integrating Detroit into the argument shows complete disregard and disdain for even the most basic understanding of recent history. The taxpaying middle class along with corporations paying their fair share only materialized in the post second world war era. There was virtually no middle class prior to the Second World War as there was limited union density. As the public service and manufacturing base grew through perhaps the first 40 years after WW II union density increased and with it the wave of prosperity, spending and families able to pay taxes to support the infrastructure that supported this robust economic growth and support the prosperity of places like Detroit. Throughout this period governments had not yet entered the era of attacking unions for purely ideological reasons. The CTF suggests that unions should concede (and I don’t care on which side of the ocean this demand comes from as the root cause of corporate greed and government ideology play out equally on both sides of the Atlantic) collectively bargained benefits for the singular purpose of catering to the conservative failings of the 30 years since government and corporations chose not pay their fair share of taxes and to seek out labour where people can be exploited as they have no legislations to protect them. The CTF is just another organization in its ignorance, intentional or otherwise, that seeks to further undermine the union movement and underfund public services such as healthcare and education by calling for concessions and lower taxes. This approach is the antithesis to what is needed. To recreate prosperity the CTF needs to demand that corporations pay their fair share of taxes and that these same corporations cease what has been an intentional process since at least 1988 of sending millions of well paying jobs offshore. In other words come to the table to think for themselves and not to parrot the conservative mantra of lower taxes and attacks on unions.

Wednesday, February 27, 2013

In response to the author of “reader delves into concerns on tritiated water and nuclear waste” letter of February 12th 2013 (Kincardine News)

Dear Editor; In response to the author of “reader delves into concerns on tritiated water and nuclear waste” letter of February 12th 2013 I feel a few counterpoints are justified. The author of the letter stumbles through a few issues and attempts to create anxiety and fear by questioning the regulatory environment that nuclear power plants and the waste management organization on the Bruce Site operate in. This genre of letter is often dressed up as some kind of environmental rescue mission when in reality the insertion of doubt, fear and anxiety is the intent and is done so with limited technical data to exacerbate the goal of generating fear at the expense of clear and concise data. The author does make some statements about the Code of Conduct within Bruce Power and OPG and that is for the companies to comment on. Further, the letter states that the incineration of waste at the WWMF is some kind of secret when it is clearly noted in publicly available information on the internet (posted by OPG). The majority of technical issues the author of the Feb 12th letter touches on are done so with little or no research. To debunk all the author’s information is not possible in a letter to the editor, but I will focus on three items; thermal environmental emissions, derived emission levels and storage of waste. The author speaks to the temperature difference between condenser cooling water inlet and outlet or more accurately known as thermal environmental emission monitoring. This temperature difference is of such high priority that if the temperature difference approaches Ministry of Environment action limits the generating units must take action up to and including shedding load. Derived emission levels are attached to all nuclear plant emissions and in the case of nuclear operators in Canada actions to mitigate emissions begin at one percent of the allowable emission limit. It is reasonable to limit my comments to refurbishment waste and low and intermediate waste and in the most highly regulated industry in the world every piece of this waste is documented and stored such that location, level of activity and level of control is known and retrievable by the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission at anytime. The author of the original letter does speak to green politicians, but it is a little odd that in that context there is no doubt cast by the author on the greenhouse emitting gas plants that must be run to back up all the “so called” green alternatives. The emissions from these plants are without a doubt harmful and under the poorly named green energy act they are built instead of the prudent course of fully utilizing the first class nuclear plants in Canada and converting the already existing coal plants at Nanticoke, Lambton and Thunder Bay to be run on natural gas and biomass. Once again the anti-nuclear / pro wind lobby throws themselves into the discussion with little preparation and a desire to create anxiety instead of recognize the future as a well mixed electrical grid with new and refurbished nuclear plants, converted coal plants, hydro-electric plants and some level of renewables that does not propagate the use of natural gas or play any role in base load generation. Dave Trumble, Kincardine

Friday, December 28, 2012

Kincardine News, In Reply to Brian Lilley’s “Another Opinion”; A long overdue look at where union dues go is needed for Canadians-Dec 24, 2012

Dear Editor; In his use of the term “Union Boss” Mr. Lilley has tipped his hand early. He immediately exposes his lack of knowledge of the union movement or perhaps his open intention to be provocative and display his ideological contempt for the very movement he declares some understanding of. The term “Union Boss” is not in any way an accurate description of people freely elected by the membership or an elected representation of the membership of the union to positions of leadership. Upon election these officials are governed by a constitution and by-laws that are approved by methods similar to that for the above noted elections. The constitution and by-laws dictate the disclosure of the information, including financial affairs, about the union and if the members wish to know this information then attending membership meetings is required. Lilley would also have people believe that unions have no requirement to report anything to financial regulators or agencies and that in some fashion they are above the law. Of course this is not true and unions, as employers, report as any other employer must do. As if he has some domain over their use Lilley’s article is decorated with the language of disclosure and fairness as those of his ilk are pre-programmed to use in this way in any discussion where socially responsible organizations that ally themselves with working people and their needs are involved. The use of this language is in common use as it is believed that it engenders support for people like Lilley who under the cloak of this language are working to undermine the effectiveness of socially progressive organizations such as unions. Lilley quotes things like 86 % of union members want to know what is going on with their union dues without setting the context of the question. As it so often is the question is open to perversion in that his statistic is likely correct, but he never notes what percentage of the 86% already receive this information by attending membership meetings of their unions. Sadly there are a percentage of union members that can’t be bothered to attend membership meetings and they will not likely be offered financial information and this is no different than for any organization where financial records are supplied. Lilley expresses surprise, even to some degree a sense of indignation, that unions and unions leaders are ready to fight back on this legislation. Lilley’s opinion makes the assumption, or at least he conveniently ignores the fact, that there are no other attacks of any kind on trade unions when in fact the implementation or the planning of attacks on the trade union movement is the current initiative of choice for countless leaders such as Harper, Wall of Saskatchewan and McGuinty of Ontario. Harper’s conservatives have legislated away collective bargaining rights for postal workers and Air Canada employees, Wall is beginning to make noise about the repugnant right to work legislation seen in Michigan and McGuinty has launched an attack on the bargaining rights of teachers that could reach all public service union members. The lack of government will to do anything to protect charter rights to free collective bargaining and the abandonment of the Electro-Motive workers in London and other manufacturing sector workers only adds to the list of attacks on workers. Even the most simple minded would see why the ideologically driven bill C- 377, in concert with the foregoing, would drive union leaders to speak and act strongly against bill C-377. Lilley expresses what has been done in other countries relative to similarities to bill C-377; this is perhaps the final undoing of his position. No trade unionist in their right mind would ever look to America as the benchmark. Beginning with Regan America leads the western industrialized world in attacks on the union movement and the destruction of the working and middle class. Not to mention the fact that the rules of engagement as found in labour law legislation are entirely different in America than in Canada thus negating any reasonable comparison. Despite what people read in the typical right wing controlled media, standards of living have always fallen when the trade union movement has been diminished. Lilley’s attempt to coast his position forward on the typical right wing ideological framework fails on all levels and is easily seen for what it is; another opinion veiled in the right wing rhetoric that would hopefully sway those unfamiliar with the real issues at stake on to their side and thus to, under false pretense, try and get people to believe that bill C-377 is anything other than what it is; “another cowardly federal lead attack on workers” There is only one fair process and that is meeting across the table where the charter right to free collective bargaining must take place and must be preserved no matter what the price and governing by ideology is eradicated. Dave Trumble, Kincardine

Wednesday, December 26, 2012

2012 In Review

Another year is drawing to a close and tradition insists that 2012 is up for review. The year is bracketed by two hopeful events. The first of these events was the rally by thousands of workers and the efforts of trade unions in January in support of sustaining the jobs at London’s Electro-Motive plant and in support of the Charter right to free collective bargaining. These efforts fell to the destructive forces of neo-liberalism, unbridled greed and globalization. The end of year and ongoing event, with the outcome still ahead of us, is the “Idle No More” campaign. In light of this First Nations lead campaign the face of seeking social justice and a civil society may change forever. Unions have witnessed the significant successes of government, corporate forces and right wing extremist media working tirelessly to disenfranchise workers and the union representatives that work in the interests of all workers. Some of the rallying cries of the attacks on workers in 2012 were austerity, pensions, public service employee compensation, right to work, return to work legislation, bill 115 and bill 377. Regan, Thatcher and Mulroney represent the pioneers of the modern day method of governing by ideology and the politics of division instead of governing in the collective good. The present day ilk of Regan, Thatcher and Mulroney have far exceeded the move to the right that these well known predecessors could have hoped for and it is in this context that this annual review is done. In 2012 we hear of the likes of Walker of Wisconsin, McGuinty of Ontario, Stephen Harper, Snyder of Michigan and the never ending demands for austerity measures. In looking at this list we see the paradigm shift that now sets 2012 apart. The approach by government and corporations is not to negotiate with workers or meet in the realm of free collective bargaining or try to find anything close to a position where collaboration may be reached. Instead it is, in 2012, to take the most repugnant nature of the right wing belligerently forward by cowardly changing legislation to undermine any and all organizations that may stand in opposition to right wing oppression of the rights of working people and the unions that democratically represent them. In 2012 workers and unions worked very hard to elect people that would work to secure their rights and maybe turn back the attacks. For this effort unions are called undemocratic special interest groups, but when people like the republicans in the Michigan state legislature ram through right to work legislation solely to undermine union membership it is strangely labeled as fair and democratic. If there is a common descriptor of 2012 it is the undeniable effort of the right to secure a perverted version of a future where only the reactionary version of conservatives and republicans survives and the recognition that “The Labour Movement is the principal force that transformed misery and despair into hope and progress”, as noted by Martin Luther King, no longer exists. With Wal-Mart workers demanding justice, unions seeking mergers to increase density, teachers fighting bill 115, workers in Michigan pushing back on right to work legislation, workers striving to hold onto collective bargaining rights and workers across the world fighting austerity in 2012 there is always hope that the improvements made in workers lives over the last 150 years won’t be lost. At the end of 2012 let there be no mistake that the goals of the right and many corporations and governments, if not all, is to push the rights that workers enjoy right off the map and to a place where there will no longer be anyone to fight for those rights. Dave Trumble, Kincardine

Tuesday, May 29, 2012

Grey-Bruce Labour Council Sees Change at Executive

For Immediate Release, May 28th, 2012 Grey-Bruce Labour Council Sees Change at Executive The Grey-Bruce Labour Council, the voice of workers in the Grey-Bruce region for over fifty years, elected a new President, Vice-President and Trustee in a mid-term by-election in Hanover on May 28th, 2012. Affiliate Unions, through their Delegates, supported Hazel-Pratt-Paige (CAW), Brad Drake (UFCW) and Becky Thompson (OPSEU) as newly the elected President, V-P for Grey and Trustee. The by-election was brought about as long standing President Dave Trumble has taken on a new role within the Labour Movement as a Staff Officer within his Union. Gogi Bhandal, CLC Staff, conducted the elections and the Council offers thanks for her dedication and assistance. The remaining Executive positions remain unchanged and are Anna Morrison (OECTA), Kevin MacKay (PWU), Mike Dunn (PWU) and Len Hope (CAW and CURC). Over the weeks leading to this meeting the Council had prepared for the pending leadership change. Past President Dave Trumble who is going to remain a delegate to Council noted that �it is clear that the work of ensuring dignity and respect for working people is sustained in the light of unprecedented attacks from government and corporations will be taken on with commitment and vigor by the new Executive and all Delegates to the Grey-Bruce Labour Council�. Newly elected President Hazel made note of her, Brad�s and Becky�s long standing experience with Labour Council �and with the strength of this rural Council and our Affiliate Unions, Friends and Partners there is little doubt that the entire Grey-Bruce Labour Council Executive and Delegates will remain a very strong voice for workers in our Region�.

Monday, May 14, 2012

Some Labour Council History

As part of the Canadian Labour Congress founding convention in 1956 Labour Councils were established across Canada. One such Labour Council was the Owen Sound and District Labour Council or as known today, the Grey-Bruce Labour Council. In 1956, and for many years after, industry flourished across Canada. Owen Sound was no exception. People found employment, put down roots and middle class lives were established. In addition the trade union movement gained momentum as people recognized that union protection would ensure that while a middle class was growing it would continue to grow as strong union representation ensured fair and equitable distribution of growing wealth. Distribution of the wealth working people created through their labour. Owen Sound and our region benefitted from shipping, manufacturing, growth in the utility sector, technology sector growth, increased public services such as healthcare and education and much more. The foundation of socially responsible and sustainable economies and communities were established and strange as it may seem, all, within a variety of governments and party politics. Throughout this time the Labour Council was a home for working people and although the issues may not be the same as they are today your local labour council gave a community voice to all working people. Clearly businesses and sectors experienced a variety of changes up to the late 1980’s, but the changes reflected nothing more than changes that had effected economies for decades; demographics, technology and demand for example. The late 1980’s began the visible and concerted attack on working people with the first free trade agreement. In short order Ontario lost hundreds of thousands of manufacturing jobs to places where people could be easily exploited. Canada lost millions of jobs to the same agreement. Owen Sound was not spared and lost jobs and industries. At the same time the public sector continued to grow as the need for public services was recognized and expanded. Along with this came increased level of unionization in this sector. This was extremely important as it was clear that public sector employees were as easily exploited as there long serving private sector manufacturing counter parts. Attached to this change came the government and media attacks on unions, public services and regulation. Not since the days of Frost in Ontario and King in Ottawa had government made a choice to attack their own people for the singular purpose of enriching corporations and undercutting their right to safe and regulated workplaces. The depth of the attack and the fact that it would be indistinguishable from Liberal to Conservative was also a first, but it became clear that it was about right wing reactionary policies compared to left wing progressive policies. The essence of this process remains unchanged except for its virulence and the addition of the fringe of the right wing that would pull each and every progressive piece of legislation out of existence. What also remains unchanged is the role that Labour Councils have played throughout this entire time. The Councils and the Grey-Bruce Labour Council have, along with every progressive organization, worked to educate people to the harm being done and to work in all aspects of society to push for a legislative framework that supports workers, keeps high paying unionized jobs at home and ensures that no vulnerable person is ever left behind. The Grey-Bruce Labour Council will experience a change in leadership at the end of May and is going to remain true to a clear and strong history of inclusiveness. Your Labour Council will not only work towards the goals noted previously, but will ensure that the workers of our communities and region will have a voice that will be heard from coast to coast if need be. As President of the Grey-Bruce Labour Council for almost all of the period from 1995 to present it is easy to see that the new leadership will not only lead, but innovate and the progressive partnerships will only be enhanced. In Solidarity Dave Trumble, President Grey-Bruce Labour Council