Revolution Solution

Sound Fiscal Management

2009-10-25T22:38:00.000-07:00

Why is it so important to have green views and a voice of reason elected to Moose Jaw City Council this election? As a citizen of Moose Jaw, I have watched as democracy has taken a back seat in past terms of City Council, and I fully recognize the need for sound fiscal management. The current recession will require innovative thinking based on sustainability in order to find and implement long-term solutions. If the right decisions are not made now, future generations will pay. This is very true of decisions Moose Jaw City Council will be making in the upcoming term. I have the experience and necessary skills for the position of City Councillor, especially in the governance area of Finance and Administration.

So, where do we start?

The City must undertake a comprehensive overview of our current fiscal operating expenditures to see where money is being spent inefficiently. More efficient spending will allow improved city services and infrastructure upgrades without increased taxation.

Once this has been done, City Council must market Moose Jaw as a great place to raise a family and own a business (because it really is!).

City Council must also lobby the Federal Government for a commitment to one cent from GST to municipal governments as a reasonable approach to stable financing. Our Constitution was set up at a time when Canada was predominantly a rural country where fewer than one in 10 people lived in cities. The taxation system was set up to greatly favour the federal and provincial levels of government. Today 80 percent of Canadians live in urban areas. Taxes are collected disproportionately at the wrong level, and the municipal level of government which runs our buses, provides our water, and should be collecting our recycling is left with less than its fair share of Canadian tax revenue to provide these services with.

Urban Canadians want our garbage collected, good transit service, safe roads, and dependable water supplies. We also want new investment in green urban infrastructure including recycling, mass transit, energy efficiency upgrades to buildings, water conservation and community amenities like parks, sports fields and arts, culture and community centres. Underlying this is an urgent need to replace aging sewer systems, roadways and water pipes.

All of these are municipal responsibilities, but Canadian municipalities are constantly struggling with how to find enough money to do it all. According to the Federation of Canadian Municipalities, 50 percent of Canadian tax revenue is spent on federal programs, 42 percent goes to the provinces and only 8 percent goes to municipal governments. Canada’s biggest fiscal imbalance is the imbalance between municipal governments and everyone else. City Council must lobby the Federal Government for a commitment to allocate one cent from GST on an approximate per capita basis to municipal governments.

Larissa Shasko will be your voice on City Council for sound fiscal management.

Vote for Larissa - Elect a youthful voice of experience to Moose Jaw City Council. A voice of reason, a vote for change.

2009-10-25T21:04:00.000-07:00

E-day is October 28th!

Moose Jaw is a beautiful city and a place I’m proud to call home, but we must address our City’s problems. We need real solutions and positive change today!

Due to changes in our global economy, industry has left Moose Jaw at a fierce pace, leaving far too many people without adequate paying jobs.

Our youth are also leaving Moose Jaw, seeking more education opportunities and brighter career paths.

Our small businesses are over-taxed.

We have no bike lanes, no plan for urban sustainability, and we have a very divided community.

This is not how things are supposed to be in the Friendly City. We need to rebuild community spirit in Moose Jaw, and we need to restore democracy on City Council.

I love this city because of its natural beauty and caring people, and because of the great potential our city has to become a vibrant and healthy community for the children of today, and tomorrow. I was married this summer, and my husband and I have chosen to stay in our home city of Moose Jaw to build our future. My commitment as a local activist and politician has always been to the people of Moose Jaw, first and foremost. I have gained much experience in recent years, and as a Political Science Student, I have gained great insight into the inner workings of our complex political system so that I have the ability and the necessary knowledge to get things accomplished as your Councillor. Sound fiscal management and restoring democracy are main priorities I will focus on. We need positive role models for our children in government, or they too will become apathetic young voters and disenchanted citizens.

If the right decisions are not made now, future generations will pay.

City Council must develop and implement a comprehensive plan for urban sustainability. For more on urban sustainability, including improved public transportation, a citywide program for recycling and composting, maximizing energy conservation throughout the city, more community gardens, a permanent farmers market for the purchase of locally produced food, bike lanes, a car share program, well-maintained sidewalks and walking paths, and ending urban sprawl while rebuilding core neighbourhoods.

In addition to supporting locally owned and small businesses, to revive our local economy we must foster the creation of green jobs by taking measures on City Council that will attract energy conservation and renewable energy industry to Moose Jaw. We can set an example for the rest of the province by meeting our energy needs through renewable energy sources and fully utilizing energy conservation methods. Energy retrofitting and the installation of decentralized renewable energy, such as solar panels, must be done at the local level, meaning the creation of many new jobs. And more students will come to Moose Jaw seeking training opportunities in Saskatchewan’s first potential off grid city.

The City also needs to lobby and partner with other levels of Government to (re)connect Moose Jaw with major centers and surrounding communities via passenger train. As the winter approaches, far too many commuters will have to face dangerous road conditions. Our close proximity to Regina and other cities is an asset that we are not fully utilizing.
As a first step, the City must work with STC to improve commuter bus service between Moose Jaw and surrounding centers, especially for students who live in Moose Jaw but attend the U of R or SIAST in Regina. As one of these students, I know first hand how inadequate public transportation for commuters between Regina and Moose Jaw is. This is adding to the ecological footprint of our city and to the gas bills of many commuters who travel between our two cities.

An important role of City Council is lobbying other levels of government to improve the lives of the people of Moose Jaw. This includes the greatly important task of lobbying the provincial government for critically needed hospital upgrades. As a dedicated and experienced activist, I will be a strong and capable voice for a hospital that is capable of serving the people of Moose Jaw with excellence. I am an experienced, well known, and respected lobbyist at the provincial level (and well known by provincial media), and I will ensure Moose Jaw is not ignored when the health of our citizens is at stake!

Sound fiscal management is also incredibly important. The City must undertake a comprehensive overview of our current fiscal operating expenditures to see where money is being spent inefficiently. More efficient spending will allow improved city services and infrastructure upgrades without increased taxation. Once this has been done, City Council must market Moose Jaw as a great place to raise a family and own a business.

To build a strong and healthy community, we must start by restoring democracy. We need a City Council that will set an example for the rest of Moose Jaw by being respectful and working together. In the many Councils and Committees I have been a part of, we aim to operate on a basis of consensus for the decisions we make. This means fostering adequate discussion between differing opinions until all those involved feel like their voices have been heard. Because we make our decisions using this method of striving for consensus, we are able to proceed on any issue with greater awareness of its potential problems, and we are also able to work together as colleagues instead of the great polarization we’ve seen happen amongst Councillors on the last City Council. As your Councillor, I will to bring this skill of consensus-based decision making to Moose Jaw City Council. I will represent your voices and raise your issues, because in a democracy, the people are in charge.

I will be a strong voice on Council for

-- Sound fiscal management

-- Safe and local food initiatives

-- Affordable housing

-- Locally owned & small businesses

-- Urban sustainability

-- The creation of Green Jobs

-- And Restoring democracy

On October 28th, I ask you to choose a voice of reason, and a vote for change.

Thank-you.

Moose Jaw Times Herald Q's & A's asked of all candidates (will be published in tomorrow's paper). My answers:

2009-10-23T12:55:00.000-07:00

1. What should the city to deal with the issue of affordable housing forlow-income citizens?

The City must partner with community organizations and other levels of Government to plan and build more affordable housing. Also, incentives should be offered to private developers such as a tax-free grace period for property that new affordable housing is built on and offering vacant city owned lots and buildings to affordable housing developers at little or no cost.

2. What do you propose should be done to mend the rift in the city createdby the multiplex debate?

We need to restore democracy in the Friendly City. We need a City Council that will set an example for the rest of Moose Jaw by being respectful and working together. This requires consensus-based decision-making. We can also bring together our divided city by embarking on a community-building plan for urban sustainability that everyone can embrace and take part in.

3. What should the city do to improve life for its young people?

We need youth leadership elected to Council to inspire more youth to make their voices heard. The City must strengthen the role of the Youth Advisory Committee, develop a plan for urban sustainability, and improve public transportation to other major cities. Council must foster the creation of Green Jobs and new training opportunities by attracting green energy industry to Moose Jaw.

4. How would you balance the need for providing and improving city serviceswith the maintaining the lowest tax rate possible, to help attract newbusinesses?

The City must undertake a comprehensive overview of our current fiscal operating expenditures to see where money is being spent inefficiently. More efficient spending will allow improved city services and infrastructure upgrades without increased taxation. Once this has been done, City Council must market Moose Jaw as a great place to raise a family and own a business.

5. What should be done to assist the city’s poorest people?

The City must create more affordable housing and ensure easy access to affordable food that is locally grown. We must rebuild a healthy community for all by making Moose Jaw a place for people instead of just cars through a plan for urban sustainability, and the city must advocate other levels of government to implement a Guaranteed Livable Income (www.livableincome.org).

What would a comprehensive plan for urban sustainability include?

2009-10-23T12:42:00.000-07:00

A basic definition of urban sustainability is "building cities for people instead of cars". Urban sustainability goes beyond environmental sustainability; it is about building healthy communities for today and tomorrow. A comprehensive plan for urban sustainability would include improved public transportation, a citywide program for recycling and composting, maximizing energy conservation throughout the city, more community gardens, a permanent farmers market for the purchase of locally produced food, bike lanes, a car share program, well-maintained sidewalks and walking paths, ending urban sprawl while rebuilding core neighbourhoods, and more!

New facebook group! Youth Matter to Moose Jaw

2009-10-19T12:34:00.000-07:00

I've just started a new facebook group called "Youth Matter to Moose Jaw" in response to a question asked by a sixteen year old at the all candidates forum last Thursday, Oct.15. The question she asked was "what are you going to do for the youth of Moose Jaw?" She said, "I know we're not old enough to vote", but we still matter. And we do! The youth of this city matter today and tomorrow. Afterall, we are the future of this city. How can we make Moose Jaw a better place to live for young people if there is no outlet to make our voices heard in this election and on City Council? Everyone talks about "why do so many youth leave Moose Jaw?", but we seldom actually ask our youth why they want to leave and what will make them stay here. We need to listen to and take leadership from the youth of this city. I will be maintaining this facebook group now and into the future as a place for Moose Jaw youth to make our voices heard on City Council.

If you live in Moose Jaw and are under the age of 30, please join this FB group at:
http://www.facebook.com/groups.php?ref=sb#/group.php?gid=177814971013

The purpose of this FB group is to foster input and discussion from the youth of Moose Jaw during the 2009 Civic Election and beyond. Just because someone is not old enough to vote doesn't mean their opinion shouldn't be heard! Moose Jaw youth, this FB group is the place to make your voice heard this election. City Council especially needs to hear the voices of those under 18, so please join today and invite your friends!

There are currently three topics posted for discussion to group members:

What would make Moose Jaw a better place for youth to live?

Do you plan to stay in Moose Jaw when you graduate?

Should we lower the voting age in Moose Jaw Civic Elections?

I just created this group last night, so please pass word on about this new FB group to as many youth in Moose Jaw as you can! E-day is October 28th!

Peace and Solidarity,

Larissa Shasko

Urban Sustainability and Affordable Housing

2009-10-17T02:32:00.000-07:00

The recent housing boom has left many renters in Moose Jaw with increased rents and little opportunity to purchase their own home. Recent fires, capital projects, and buildings badly in need of repair have left many low-income renters displaced. Meanwhile, Moose Jaw continues to grow outward and we continue to see missed opportunities to refurbish existing buildings, often heritage buildings. Affordable housing initiatives must take priority. Council must develop and implement a comprehensive plan for urban sustainability in Moose Jaw, meaning we need to start building the friendly city to be a place for people instead of just cars. Urban sustainability, including improved public transportation, a citywide program for recycling and composting, maximizing energy conservation throughout the city, more community gardens, a permanent farmers market for the purchase of locally produced food, bike lanes, a car share program, well-maintained sidewalks and walking paths, and ending urban sprawl while rebuilding core neighbourhoods.

A key part of urban sustainability is reviving core neighbourhoods through affordable housing initiatives. This requires Council to work with community organizations & follow their recommendations for improving low-income housing opportunities in Moose Jaw.
The City will have to partner with these community organizations and other levels of Government to plan and build more affordable housing, and where opportunities exist to turn city-owned properties or heritage buildings into affordable housing, these opportunities should be seized.

Urban sustainability is a step we must take today to foster a brighter tomorrow. If the right decisions are not made now, future generations will pay. On October 28th, Vote for Larissa Shasko, Vote for Tomorrow.

Tourism Moose Jaw survey

2009-10-17T02:29:00.000-07:00

Below are my answers for the Tourism Moose Jaw Survey sent to all candidates for Councillor in the 2009 Moose Jaw Civic Election:

1. Where do you place tourism in Moose Jaw’s economic future?

Tourism is clearly a key component of Moose Jaw’s economic future. Tourism creates jobs and is a substantial source of revenue for many of Moose Jaw’s businesses. Tourism knits this country together and enables Canadians to explore our historic and legendary city. To ensure a strong economic future for tourism in Moose Jaw, we must foster a green, low-carbon tourism industry and market it responsibly throughout the world. The city must help to provide exceptional tourist experiences by keeping our beautiful city parks and walking trails well maintained and bio-diverse. Our sidewalks and streets must also be well maintained to ensure a vibrant tourism industry in Moose Jaw. The fastest growing sector of tourism is Eco-tourism. To foster a vibrant and growing tourism industry, our city will need bicycle lanes (to capture on bicycle touring in the summer and to provide a greener way for tourists to explore Moose Jaw), and City Council will need to work with other levels of government to (re)connect Moose Jaw to major centres via passenger train service. Through our various approaches, Tourism Moose Jaw and the City of Moose Jaw can work together to create a sustainable and vibrant economic future for tourism in our city.

2. How do you foresee the future relationship between Tourism Moose Jaw and the City of Moose Jaw?

To ensure an even stronger and sustainable future for the tourism sector in the friendly city, the City must provide continued support to Tourism Moose Jaw, and we must work together with other levels of government to foster the creation of a vibrant sector of Eco-tourism through measures such as bicycle lanes and connecting Moose Jaw to major centres via passenger train. As the fastest growing sector of tourism, Eco-tourism can provide our community with increased revenues and new jobs. As we move into a time where sustainability must guide our actions in order to ensure long-term economic success, I foresee a growing importance of tourism to our local economy, meaning a strong and important future relationship between the City of Moose Jaw and Tourism Moose Jaw.

3. How important is outside marketing of Moose Jaw, either by the City or by Tourism Moose Jaw?

Outside marketing of Moose Jaw is very important to the creation of all sectors of a green economy in Moose Jaw. We must foster a green, low-carbon tourism industry and market it responsibly throughout the world. The City must also pursue outside marketing of Moose Jaw in order to attract green energy industry to our city in fields such as energy conservation and renewable energy technologies, which will create many new local jobs – Green Jobs.

Moose Jaw & District Labour Council Questionnaire

2009-10-16T13:39:00.000-07:00

Below are my answers to the Moose Jaw & District Labour Council Questionnaire asked of all candidates for Councillor in the 2009 Moose Jaw Civic Election:

1) What concrete steps can the City of Moose Jaw take within the next 10 years to reduce its environmental footprint, specifically, the reduction of greenhouse gases, energy conservation and the adoption of cleaner sources of energy?

The City of Moose Jaw must immediately develop and implement a comprehensive plan for urban sustainability, including improved public transportation, a citywide program for recycling and composting, a recycling program for businesses, maximizing energy conservation throughout the city (especially in city owned buildings and in regard to our outdated traffic lights and overused streetlights), more community gardens, a full-scale farmers market for the purchase of locally produced food, bike lanes, a car share program, well-maintained sidewalks and walking paths (to encourage more pedestrians), and ending urban sprawl while rebuilding core neighbourhoods instead. A basic definition of urban sustainability is “building cities for people instead of cars”. In order to reduce Moose Jaw’s greenhouse gas emissions, we must rethink our one car per person mentality, but first, the City must take measures so that it is possible and convenient to live without a car in Moose Jaw.

Furthermore, the City of Moose Jaw must do all we can to attract renewable energy and energy conservation industry to our city. We can set an example for the rest of the province by meeting our energy needs through renewable energy sources and fully utilizing energy conservation methods. Energy retrofitting and the installation of decentralized renewable energy, such as solar panels, must be done at the local level, meaning the creation of many new jobs—Green Jobs. Students will also come to Moose Jaw seeking training opportunities in Saskatchewan’s first potential off grid city. Moose Jaw can reduce greenhouse gases and limit the size of our growing ecological footprint—but we need strong leaders elected to City Council who are committed to doing so. We have waited too long to take serious action, and future generations who will live here are depending on us to make our city sustainable now. Thank-you for asking this very important question.

2) What specific steps will you take to encourage residents to incorporate environmental sustainability into their daily lives? How will you ensure that all residents are made aware and are able to access new and existing environmental programs and services?

To encourage residents to incorporate environmental sustainability into their daily lives, the City must make environmental sustainability as accessible and as convenient as possible to those who live and operate businesses here. As mentioned above, this will require immediately developing and implementing a comprehensive plan for urban sustainability, including improved public transportation, a citywide program for recycling and composting, a recycling program for businesses, maximizing energy conservation throughout the city, more community gardens, a full-scale farmers market for the purchase of locally produced food, bike lanes, a car share program, well-maintained sidewalks and walking paths, ending urban sprawl while rebuilding core neighbourhoods, and more.

Public education is a key component of urban sustainability, and the Moose Jaw Advisory Committee on the Environment (M.A.C.E.) is ideally situated to foster this public education on how to incorporate environmental sustainability into the daily lives of the people who live here. I have served as Member at Large on M.A.C.E. since the beginning of 2009, and there is some solid action being taken by Committee members toward public education on waste reduction (composting, recycling, reducing, reusing, etc.). However, throughout my term, the focus of M.A.C.E. has been mainly on waste reduction (in order to achieve a concrete goal with limited resources and limited staff). In order to broaden this focus and improve the ability of M.A.C.E. to foster greater public education while also ensuring all residents are made aware and are able to access new and existing environmental programs and services, perhaps the City needs to devote more funding and more focus to M.A.C.E.

3) How do you see the transit system evolving to meet the needs of all residents and communities?

Moose Jaw’s transit system must be made more accessible by extending hours and days of operation and taking a comprehensive overview of current bus routes. As someone who does not own a car and gets around Moose Jaw by foot or public transportation whenever possible, I have a good understanding of how the transit system can evolve to meet the needs of all residents and all communities. Hours of service must be extended to include evenings, and bus service should be offered on Sundays and holidays. The current limited schedule does not allow those without a car to get to work if they work outside of regular work hours (‘banking hours’). Moose Jaw’s transit system is a great asset and a great step toward urban sustainability, but it is not realistically capable of taking the place of a car for someone living here. The operating routes, which currently work on a loop cycle, tend to make public transit somewhat less convenient. For example, it takes five minutes for me to get downtown by bus where I live, but nearly half an hour to get home. This is fine in a city the size of Regina, but in Moose Jaw, where it takes a maximum of ten minutes to get between any two points in the city, I believe this could be made more accessible/convenient, and doing so should attract increased use of our transit system.

I also think it is worthwhile to look into extending transit service to surrounding communities. Partnering with Saskatchewan Transportation Company may be an option to pursue. I currently commute two days a week to Regina for class at the U of R, and I take the bus whenever possible. But it is expensive (at $26 a round trip to Regina for students), and the schedule is pretty limited. There are many people and students who commute between Moose Jaw and Regina (and vice-versa) on a daily basis. The City must advocate for and partner with other levels of Government to (re)connect Moose Jaw with major centers and surrounding communities via passenger train.

4) What steps can the City of Moose Jaw take to provide safe and affordable housing that is integrated into the community?

The recent housing boom has left many renters in Moose Jaw with increased rent and little opportunity to purchase their own home. Recent fires, capital projects, and buildings badly in need of repair have left many low-income renters displaced. Meanwhile, Moose Jaw continues to grow outward and our City Council continues to find money for capital projects. Affordable housing initiatives must take priority. As noted earlier, Council must develop and implement a comprehensive plan for urban sustainability in Moose Jaw, and one of the main components of urban sustainability is reviving core neighbourhoods through affordable housing initiatives. This requires the City to work with community organizations and follow their recommendations for affordable housing in Moose Jaw. The City will have to partner with these community organizations and other levels of Government to build more affordable housing, and where opportunities exist to turn city-owned properties or heritage buildings into affordable housing, these opportunities should be seized.

5) How will you ensure that marginalized residents have increased input in community and social planning?

I will push for the (re)establishment of a Social Planning Advisory Committee to provide marginalized residents with the opportunity for increased input in community and social planning. I will also be fully available to meet with anyone from Moose Jaw who has input into community and social planning, and I will provide a strong voice on City Council for the issues raised and the input provided. We must work together to ensure a healthy community and happy lives for everyone in the Friendly City.

6) (a) What is your short and long term vision for the growth of Moose Jaw? How do you hope to balance new growth with the revitalization of downtown and addressing the infrastructure problems of other neighbourhoods?

The City must attract green energy industry to Moose Jaw in order to create many new jobs. I have watched with great concern as industry has left Moose Jaw over the past few years, and in order to stop people from leaving Moose Jaw, we must find ways to provide good paying, meaningful, and sustainable employment to those in need. Green Jobs will provide long-term growth for our city, including training opportunities.

City Council must take measures to end urban sprawl and to rebuild core neighbourhoods instead. The population of our city hasn’t changed much over the years, but our city continues to grow outward. Clearly this is not sustainable, especially as more businesses move to the outskirts of the city to be closer to those living in these newly developed areas. Meanwhile, our downtown struggles, our mall is too vacant, and our core neighbourhoods are plagued with deteriorating buildings, sidewalks, and streets. The City needs to make a commitment to grow our community, not simply the geographical space our community consumes. This is possible with the right leadership.

(b) How do you expect to fund this?

As a citizen of Moose Jaw, I have watched as some capital projects are implemented while others are overlooked. I am not sure what has guided these decisions, but as Councillor, I will be able to provide leadership in this process. We need to make sure crumbling infrastructure is not overlooked because “we can’t afford it” when are told we can afford a new multiplex. Sound fiscal management is my answer. However, overtaxing our small businesses and low-income residents is NOT an acceptable answer, and this must be addressed by the newly elected Council.

As Finance and Administrative Director of the Young Greens of Canada for the past two years, I have demonstrated the necessary skills to provide sound fiscal management concerning all decisions made by City Council. In my role as Finance and Administrative Director, I have managed an entire departmental budget, and with proper management of our finances, the Young Greens Council has been able to meet many more goals than we had originally hoped to, and we had a small surplus of funds left over at year’s end. I am also the Leader of a provincial political party that is debt free. We need sound fiscal management of this sort on City Council. If we can afford to build new neighbourhoods and commercial areas on the outskirts of our city, surely we can start spending these funds on rebuilding our core neighbourhoods and downtown area instead. We will not begin to lower our ecological footprint or to regain our sense of community unless we take measures to end urban sprawl.

7) What is your position on the full or partial privatization of public services and projects?

I favour public ownership and the long-term benefits it offers.

8) How do you see your role as a City Councillor being a support mechanism for workers?

I believe that in a democracy, the people are in charge. I will be fully accountable to the people of Moose Jaw, and I will fully represent the interests of our citizens and our workers. I will be a dedicated voice on Council for the interests of workers, and I will be available to meet with any worker who has an issue to raise with Council.

What can we do to grow Moose Jaw in both population and the economy while being world leaders in environmental-sustainability?

2009-10-12T00:17:00.000-07:00

In addition to supporting locally owned small businesses, we need to push for the creation of green jobs by taking measures on City Council that will attract energy conservation and renewable energy industry to Moose Jaw. We can set an example for the rest of the province by meeting our energy needs through renewable energy sources and fully utilizing energy conservation methods. Energy retrofitting and the installation of decentralized renewable energy, such as solar panels, must be done at the local level, meaning the creation of many new jobs. People go where the jobs are, and students will also come to Moose Jaw seeking training opportunities in Saskatchewan’s first potential off grid city. As our population grows, City Council needs to promote an end to urban sprawl and take measures to rebuild core neighbourhoods instead.

On October 28th, vote for sustainable solutions to Moose Jaw's failing economy. Elect Larissa Shasko as Councillor.

What can we do to make Moose Jaw City Council work better?

2009-10-11T22:30:00.000-07:00

We need to restore democracy on City Council. In the many Councils and Committees I have been a part of, we aim to operate on a basis of consensus for the decisions we make. This means fostering adequate discussion between differing opinions until all those involved feel like their voices have been heard. Because we make our decisions using this method of striving for consensus, we are able to proceed on any issue with greater awareness of its potential problems, and we are also able to work together as colleagues instead of the great polarization we’ve seen happen amongst Councillors on the last City Council. As your Councillor, I will to bring this skill of consensus-based decision making to Moose Jaw City Council. I will represent your voices and raise your issues, because in a democracy, the people are in charge.

It’s time to restore democracy in Moose Jaw. On October 28th, vote for real solutions. Vote for Larissa Shasko.

"No Nukes - Go Renewables" Rally and Parade - Today at 1 P.M. in Saskatoon!

2009-10-04T00:52:00.000-07:00

Gather at the Bowl at the U of S campus 1:00 for the Parade to the Vimy Memorial Bandshell (20th St and Spadina Cres) or simply come to the Bandshell directly where the program will start at 2 PM

Keynote speaker is Winona LaDuke, a renowned Native American envioronmentalist who is leading her community in a major renewable energy community development initiative to reduce fossil fuel consumption and to prevent nuclear expansion.

Other speakers and topics at the rally include medical isotopes, the economics of nuclear, nuclear waste issues, renewable energy and citizen involvement, with Larissa Shasko, Peter Prebble, Jim Harding, Ryan Mieli and others. Local musicians will also perform.

For more information please visit www.cleangreensask.ca or phone 373-8078 or join our Facebook page at http://www.facebook.com/business/dashboard/?ref=sb#/pages/Coalition-for-a-Clean-Green-Saskatchewan/83935014222

"No Nukes - Go Renewables"
Rally and Parade
Sunday, October 4th in Saskatoon

It's time to get things done in Moose Jaw!

2009-09-30T23:51:00.000-07:00

Long before the nuclear debate heated up, and long before I was asked by members of the Green Party of Saskatchewan to run for the leadership of the party after Amber Jones stepped down as Leader, I had made the decision to run for Moose Jaw City Council. I moved to Moose Jaw five years ago, and I instantly found "home". I grew up in Regina and the nearby small town of Lumsden, so Moose Jaw is the perfect fit between the beauty of Lumsden and the amenities and buzz of Regina. Moose Jaw is such a great city that my new husband (Ryan Stusek) and I have chosen to stay in Moose Jaw and build our future in the "friendly city". But there is so much to be done to prepare Moose Jaw for the future, and this work is simply not getting done by recent City Councils. It's time for positive change in Moose Jaw, which is exactly why I am running.

I have seen too many idle Councillors who run and get elected to Moose Jaw City Council to get their own motives accomplished instead of working for the people of this city. As a student of Political Science and a dedicated political activist, I have real experience to offer on Council and the necessary tools to get real change accomplished to improve the lives of the people of this city.

I also want to see an end to the lack of democracy we have seen on City Council in recent terms. It will take electing Councillors who are really there to work for the people of Moose Jaw in order for democracy to return to Moose Jaw! Furthermore, electoral reform is needed at all levels, including Moose Jaw civic elections. Did you know that there are no election financing rules for Moose Jaw civic elections? This admittedly puts a university student at an unfair advantage to those who may be at the end of their careers or retired and who have already built their "nest egg". So to that note, donations to the campaign to elect Larissa Shasko are welcome! Please contact me at larissa.shasko@gmail.com to volunteer, to make a donation, or to request a sign.

So why is it so important to have green views and a voice of reason elected to Moose Jaw City Council this election? As a citizen of Moose Jaw, I have watched as democracy has taken a back seat in past terms of City Council, and I really recognize the need for good fiscal management. Resources are running out at all levels of government, both monetary and natural resources. The current recession will require innovative thinking based on sustainability in order to find and implement long-term solutions. If the right decisions are not made now, future generations will pay. This is very true of decisions Moose Jaw City Council will be making in the upcoming term. We need a voice of reason on City Council. I have the experience and necessary skills for the position of City Councillor. As a Political Science Major and dedicated political activist, I have the tools and the "know how" to get things done!

I will be a voice on Moose Jaw City Council for urban sustainability (building communities for people instead of cars), safe and local food initiatives, low-income housing, locally owned businesses, and the creation of much needed Green Jobs in Moose Jaw through doing all we can to support and attract the renewable energy sector.

On October 28th, I ask for your support as Councillor for Moose Jaw City Council.

To find out more about me, read this recent profile in the Sasquatch (an independent Saskatchewan newspaper): http://sasquatchnews.com/keen-green-on-the-scene/

Peace and Solidarity,

Larissa Shasko

-- Vote for the change you want to see in the world. --

Democratic Bankruptcy - Time for the Solution!

2009-09-28T13:58:00.000-07:00

In the 2008 federal election, a key focus of my campaign as the Green Party Candidate for the riding of Palliser was democracy, or rather Canada's lack of it. According to Fair Vote Canada, the votes of 50.7% of Canadians who voted in the 2008 federal election elected no one. The push for strategic voting did not work, and vote swapping failed to produce results. Canadians were left with another Conservative minority government that refuses to offer solutions to growing emission levels and irreversible environmental degradation. Stephen Harper won't feel the consequences from his failure to take action on climate change, but the youth of this country will.

In the 2008 federal election, more than 60% of Canadians voted against the Conservatives, yet they are now our ruling government.

All across the country, Canadians are calling for electoral reform. Our current electoral system is a glorified "winner takes all" game. Unfortunately, this has led to voter apathy. The last federal election marked the lowest voter turnout in Canadian history! Only 59% of eligible voters actually voted.

Stephen Harper was wrong; Parliament isn't dysfunctional, our electoral system is!

Canada's "first-past-the-post" voting system is outdated and is failing to produce results reflective of the general public. Democratic politics has evolved significantly in Canada, yet our voting system has stayed the same.
Both federally and provincially, our voting system was designed for a two party system, but we are now represented by multiple different and distinct political parties. An electoral system of proportional representation would make every vote count. Political parties would receive a percentage of seats in the House of Commons or Legislature based on the percentage of the popular vote they receive. Governments elected by proportional representation reflect the priorities of all voters.

Nearly one million people who voted for the Green Party of Canada in the 2008 federal election were ignored because the Green Party's national support is spread out broadly across Canada. At the same time, political parties with dense regional support wound up being over-represented in Parliament. In the 2008 federal election, the Green Party of Canada received 7% of the popular vote but did not receive a single seat in the House of Commons. Meanwhile, the Bloc received 10% of the popular vote and won 50 seats. Under a system of proportional representation, the Green Party of Canada would have received 23 seats instead of zero, and the Bloc would have received 28 seats instead of 50. Clearly, our electoral system is in need of reform. It could be considered unbalanced at best.

In the Saskatchewan, the Conservatives received 54% of the votes in the 2008 federal election, yet they won 94% of the seats (all but one). Since many people in Saskatchewan are tired of having their votes ignored, voter turnout in our province was only 49%! It is time to put an end to democratic bankruptcy; it is time to restructure our electoral system. We need proportional representation.

Our current electoral system turns candidates and political parties into competitors instead of colleagues. It is hard to get cooperative work done in government in a system like this. If we are going to take concrete action on climate change, Parliament will have to cooperate, and so will every province in this country and every country in the world. Proportional representation would reduce the overly partisan nature of our current political system that tends to make cooperation difficult. An electoral system of proportional representation would encourage collaboration and compromise so that elected representatives can stop fighting and can start taking action.

At an all-candidates forum held in Moose Jaw during the 2008 federal election, all four candidates in the riding of Palliser were asked if we would support an electoral system of proportional representation. Much to my surprise, all of us said yes. With another federal election call on the horizon, now is the time to push this issue; Canadians are ready for this change.

Electoral reform is the next step in the fight for democracy in Canada, and in Saskatchewan.

-----
Larissa Shasko,
Leader of the Green Party of Saskatchewan
2008 Green Party of Canada Candidate for Palliser
Treasurer of the newly formed Saskatchewan Chapter of Fair Vote Canada.

Founded in January of 2009, Fair Vote Saskatchewan is a multi-partisan organization open to supporters of all political parties as well as those without any political affiliation. Working together as colleagues, we foster public education on proportional representation and we advocate for the need to restructure our electoral system to be proportionate. For more information on the Saskatchewan Chapter of Fair Vote Canada, visit the website at:

http://fairvotesask.blogspot.com

Green Party of Saskatchewan UDP Stakeholder Presentation

2009-08-28T22:47:00.000-07:00

Green Party of Saskatchewan UDP Stakeholder Presentation

Presented in Regina on June 23, 2009 at 10:00 am

Presentation by Larissa Shasko
Leader of the Green Party of Saskatchewan

The Uranium Development Partnership Report:
A lost opportunity to develop a sustainable energy future in Saskatchewan

The UDP Report is:
--Not socially acceptable
--Not environmentally appropriate

The Uranium Development Partnership public consultation meetings have drawn huge crowds of people, and the vast majority of people attending the UDP meetings have overwhelmingly rejected the idea of nuclear power and a nuclear fuel waste dump in Saskatchewan.

However, the UDP Report is not about "IF", but about "HOW" the items in the UDP Report will be achieved. The UDP Report is a business plan for expanding the uranium industry, and therefore, the environmental and public safety risks have been written off as externalities. They have not been properly considered or studied. The Government of Saskatchewan needs to immediately fund and release independent studies into the health and public safety risks and the environmental impact of nuclear power and uranium mining. Studies of this type are long overdue, and it is scary to think that the Government of Saskatchewan would propose expanding the uranium industry without a good understanding of the health and safety risks and the environmental impact.
Until such studies have been completed, expanding Saskatchewan’s uranium industry cannot be deemed environmentally appropriate or socially acceptable.

The UDP Report is biased.

The UDP Report is not about energy options for Saskatchewan; it is about propping up the uranium industry. Most of the members of the UDP are known to be proponents of nuclear development. Many of them work for the nuclear industry. Both the traditional political right and left in Saskatchewan would likely agree that promoting private gain at public expense is unacceptable.

Members of the UDP:
Duncan Hawthorne, President and CEO of Bruce Power

Jerry Grandey, President and CEO of Cameco Corporation
Armand Laferrere, President and CEO of AREVA Canada

Chair of the UDP:
Dr. Richard Florizone, Vice-President of Finance and Resources at the University of Saskatchewan

Is this a conflict of interest?

A conflict of interest occurs when an individual or organization has an interest that might compromise their reliability.

The CEOs of Bruce Power, Cameco, and AREVA, stand to benefit financially from the initiatives in the UDP report, and they have a duty to represent nuclear power and uranium mining in the best possible light. The Chair of the UDP is the Vice-President of Finance and Resources at a university that would obtain a huge amount of funding for the research and development that is proposed in the UDP Report.

Furthermore, the Uranium Development Partnership is composed of twelve men and zero women. Women are consitutionally guaranteed equality in Canada by the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, yet the UDP is completely void of gender balance. There are different implications of nuclear power for women than there are for men, particularly in regard to our reproductive systems and in relation to our role as mothers. Public opinion polls have indicated that the women of Saskatchewan are against nuclear power.

At a press conference held at the Saskatchewan Legislature on April 17, 2009, Elizabeth May, the Leader of the Green Party of Canada said the following about the Uranium Development Partnership Report:
“The so-called environmental rep on the Uranium Development Partnership is a paid lobbyist for the nuclear industry. This is a sham. This is not the report on which government should base decisions. This is the equivalent of a report from lobbyists telling government how they want them to spend their money. This isn't the fox guarding the chicken coops. This is the fox report recommending how the chicken coops can best be consumed by the foxes.”
Elizabeth May said she was also disappointed that the report “never even bothered to look at alternatives.”

Climate Change: “a political certainty”

At a lecture at the University of Regina Johnson Shoyama Graduate School of Public Policy on June 18, 2009, Dr. Florizone said that climate change has become a political reality and that the adoption of carbon pricing is now being viewed as a political certainty. The UDP Report uses climate change as a justification for nuclear power in Saskatchewan. Even if we did not export the nuclear power to Alberta for production of the tar sands as the authors of the UDP Report propose, nuclear power is not capable of having a big enough impact to make little more than a dent in the fight against climate change. Plus, the radioactive waste we would be left with for hundreds of thousands of years is not only bound to have devastating long-term health and ecological consequences, it would also put the people of Saskatchewan and surrounding areas in great danger in times of war.

There is a great amount of public “miseducation” about nuclear power amongst the people of Saskatchewan. For many, their knowledge of nuclear power been obtained from the uranium industry itself in large, overly simplistic, and incredibly misleading adverstisements and billboards. I am horrified by the amount of people that think nuclear is clean and green. It would be extremely dangerous to call a referendum on this issue any time in the near future due to the lack of balanced education the public has been exposed to about the benefits of nuclear versus the risks. Infact, the public can not be properly educated about the risks until the Government of Saskatchewan funds and makes public independant studies into the health and public safety risks and the environmental impact of nuclear power and uranium mining. How could the public possibly make an informed decision on the issue of nuclear power in Saskatchewan without knowing what the risks are? For that matter, how can $3 million be spent on a feasibility study without consideration of the environmental and health/public safety impacts of the initiatives proposed by the UDP?

The Government of Saskatchewan has a duty to end the public “miseducation” on nuclear power and uranium mining.

For example, nuclear power is NOT emissions free. Large quantities of greenhouse gases are produced in the mining and refining of uranium as well as during the long construction period of the power plant.

Each gigawatt of nuclear energy requires 170 tonnes of uranium. When the uranium is processed into fuel, 250,000 tonnes of carbon are emitted for every 1000 megawatts produced. Nuclear energy produces huge amounts of greenhouse gases. Recent studies also note that once the current high-grade uranium deposits are depleted, carbon emissions will greatly increase as low quality ores have to be refined.[1]

Renewable energy is relatively inexpensive, and its technical challenges are dwarfed by those of nuclear power, which, after more than half a century, still has no way to store its radioactive waste that remains toxic for one million years!

It is incredibly misleading to use climate change as a justification for nuclear power in Saskatchewan when the UDP proposes exporting 4-5000 MW of electricity to Alberta for tar sands production. The Alberta Tar Sands have recently been deemed the “most destructive project on earth” by Environmental Defence Canada[2] because the tar sands will single-handedly make it impossible for Canada to lower greenhouse gas emissions anywhere near what is needed to meet international Kyoto targets.[3] Using nuclear power for tar sands production would actually be taking us closer to the “tipping point” of climate change catastrophe.

At Dr. Florizone’s lecture at the University of Regina Johnson Shoyama Graduate School of Public Policy on June 18, 2009, Dr. Florizone said that nuclear “only becomes cost competitive when you have carbon pricing.” The first problem with this statement is that we do not have carbon pricing in Saskatchewan yet. Carbon pricing is not being proposed by the SaskParty Government, and as a student of political science, I do not expect it to be proposed by either the SaskParty or the NDP in the next election. Many would say proposing the carbon tax in the last federal election single-handedly lost the election for the Liberals. There does not appear to be much support for the carbon tax from either Stephen Harper or Brad Wall. If nuclear only becomes cost competitive when you have carbon pricing, then nuclear is not cost competitive in Saskatchewan at this time.

Furthermore, the purpose of the carbon tax is to make polluting less attractive. Considering the toxic radioactive waste pollution of nuclear power that cannot be stored, treated, or disposed of safely, it is completely unacceptable for the carbon tax to be leveraged as incentive for expansion of the uranium industry. Government will never be able to successfully implement solutions to climate change if they allow large final emitters to find innovative ways out of the carbon tax while actually profiting from it. Take the University of Regina Petroleum Technology Research Centre (PTRC) for example. The PTRC researches carbon sequestration, and the PTRC is heavily funded by large international oil companies who plan to use carbon sequestration for enhanced oil recovery. They plan to pump the sequestered carbon into dried up oil wells to change the viscosity of the dried up oil so they can pump thirty more years of oil out of the ground. Large oil companies are investing huge amounts of money into carbon sequestration at the PTRC so that if any money is lost due to a carbon tax increasing the cost of gas, they can compensate for this loss of profits by increasing their supply of oil through enhanced oil recovery. This is another case of an unacceptable abuse of a tax on carbon, which is a tool designed to reduce pollution. The carbon tax is not intended to fuel nuclear expansion or enhanced oil recovery.

The UDP Report would head us in the wrong direction. We need green energy jobs, energy conservation, and renewable energy technologies. We need to start building a sustainable energy future.

According to Ecological Economist William Rees, “there is general agreement that no development path is sustainable if it depends on the exhaustion of productive assets.”[4] Rees argues that since “human-made capital is made from natural capital and requires natural capital to function, … natural capital is prerequisite to manufactured capital.”[5] The economy is dependant upon the environment for natural capital. If natural capital is exhausted, productive assets will be also. Long-term economic sustainability can not be secured without adressing the environmental crisis and focusing on sustaining nature first.

It’s called ecological wisdom. Ecological Wisdom is a key guiding principle of the Green Party of Saskatchewan.[6]

Just because we won the lottery by living in Saskatchewan doesn’t mean we have to spend all of our winnings in one generation. If we continue to be heavily reliant on extraction and exportation of non-renewable resources, what will be left of our province when these resources run out? What will be left for the people who live here?

COST:
“Spending billions of dollars on costly nuclear power would rob Saskatchewan of the chance to go green with clean and safe energy through increased energy conservation and renewable energy technologies. We only get one chance to fight climate change. This is our chance to go green and to go renewable.”
- Larissa Shasko, Leader of the Green Party of Saskatchewan

"The industry doesn't make sense. It will never survive without tremendous government subsidies," -
Elizabeth May, Leader of the Green Party of Canada

Nuclear “only becomes cost competitive when you have carbon pricing.”
- Dr. Florizone, June 18/09, U of R

The Green Party believes that energy choices should be economically rational. The best energy choices to respond to the climate crisis should be those that deliver the greatest reduction of GHG per dollar invested. By this criterion, nuclear energy is among the very worst options. Reactors cost billions of dollars, take more than a decade to build, operate unreliably after about the first dozen years of operation, and only produce one type of energy: electricity. Even if the industry were “green and clean” as claimed by the pro-nuclear propaganda efforts, it fails on the economics. Nevertheless, it is neither clean nor green.

Is Nuclear safe?
In addition to the risks of radioactive leaks and nuclear accidents, nuclear energy has an inevitable link to nuclear weapons proliferation. India made its first bomb from spent fuel from a CANDU reactor. As well, depleted uranium waste is increasingly and routinely used to coat bullets and missiles in “conventional” warfare, leaving a legacy of radioactive contamination as an on-going health and environmental threat to civilians post-conflict.
A reactor’s fuel rods, pipes, tanks, and valves can leak. Mechanical failure and human error can also cause leaks. As a nuclear plant ages, so does the equipment, and leaks generally increase.
It doesn’t take an accident for a nuclear power plant to release radioactivity into our air, water and soil. All it takes is the plant’s everyday routine operation, and federal regulations permit these radioactive releases.

It is scientifically established that low-level radiation damages tissues, cells, DNA, and other vital molecules causing programmed cell death (apoptosis), genetic mutations, cancers, leukemia, birth defects, and reproductive, immune, and endocrine system disorders.

A recent study commissioned by the Federal Office for Radiation Protection in Germany and made public on December 10th, 2007 examined cancer rates in young children between 1980 and 2003.[7] It showed a 60% increase in solid cancers and a 117% increase in leukemia among children up to five years of age living within 5 km of 16 German nuclear reactors. It also found a 20 to 40% increase for all cancers in children living within a 50 km radius of the plants. These nuclear power plants were operating under normal conditions, with radiation releases well within levels allowed for civilian populations.[8]
This new evidence from Germany of an association between increased cancers and proximity to nuclear facilities raises difficult questions. Should pregnant women and young children be advised to move away from them? Should local residents eat vegetables from their gardens? And, crucially, shouldn't those governments around the world who are planning to build more reactors think again?

Remember Chernobyl?

I was only four years of age when Chernobyl happened, and even I remember Chernobyl. I remember it with fear.

Chernobyl: April 26th, 1986 - the world’s worst nuclear accident.

Chernobyl is located 80 miles Northwest of Kiev, the ancient capital of the Ukraine.

A routine test went wrong setting up a chain reaction, creating an explosion that blew off the reactor’s 1000 tonne steel and concrete lid.
It spewed out atleast 200 times more radiation than the bombing of Hiroshima. 600,000 clean-up workers were sent in. The first set of clean-up workers died within a few hours from radiation burns. Thousands of children and adults were stricken with radiation sickness, leukemia, and cancer.

Over 4.6 million hectares of agricultural land in the Ukraine was contaminated. Thousands of people have died as a result of Chernobyl. The victims of Chernobyl are still being born today.
Infant mortality in the Ukraine stands at twice the European average.
There has also been an increase of sterility in parents plus an increase in genetic damage and congenital deformities among their offspring.

Source: The Problem with Nuclear is the Danger of Accidents and Near Accidents (booklet), Compiled by Bill Adamson, Member, ICUCEC, Inter Church Uranium Committee Educational Co-operative, October 2008.

“First-of-a-kind risk”

Nuclear power plants of the type proposed for Saskatchewan are not in operation now, nor have they ever been tested anywhere. A precursor of AECL’s ARC-1000 (ARC-700) was withdrawn from U.S. licensing after the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) predicted design/safety issues. (The NRC believes that during a loss-of-coolant-accident, power would surge rather than decrease.) Do Saskatchewan people want to be the subjects of a nuclear safety experiment?

At Dr. Florizone’s recent lecture at the University of Regina Johnson Shoyama Graduate School of Public Policy on June 18, 2009, Dr. Florizone pointed to how Ontario has just decided to go forward with one of the reactor models proposed by the UDP for Saskatchewan. What he said was both shocking and horrifying. Dr. Florizone spoke of the “first of a kind risk” involved with a nuclear reactor that has never been tested before, and he said that “now we can learn from Ontario’s mistakes.” I do not think this is an acceptable statement for the UDP to be using as a selling point considering I have many young friends who live in Ontario, and they do not want to be the subjects of a nuclear safety experiment either. Why wasn’t the UDP talking about this “first of a kind risk” before Ontario approved the model that we could have been building first?

No insurance company in the world will insure nuclear power plants. If they are insured, it is by governments. In Canada, they are not insured.

Medical isotopes can be made without nuclear fission.

Although many radio-isotopes used in industry, medicine and scientific research can be produced inside a nuclear reactor, most of them (and many more besides) can also be produced inside a particle accelerator such as a cyclotron. Thus, even if there were no nuclear reactors in existence, there would continue to be an extensive use of a wide variety of artificial radio-isotopes produced in accelerators.

Although accelerators do create small quantities of lingering radioactivity, they do not pose the staggering high-level waste and proliferation problems associated with nuclear reactors, nor do they have any potential for catastrophic accidents of any kind, nor are they capable of producing weapons materials in militarily significant amounts.[9]

The market for cobalt-60 -- one of the major radio-isotopes currently produced in Canada is not expanding, but shrinking -- as a result of which AECL has had to lay off (in recent years) many hundreds of workers associated with cobalt-60 production. As safer alternative technologies take over and as even safer alternatives are developed, the use of cobalt-60 may be phased out altogether.[10]

It is seriously misleading to state that nuclear medicine or the use of radiation in industry and in scientific research depends in any essential way upon nuclear reactors. Such uses existed long before the first nuclear reactors were built and will continue to exist long after the last reactor is shut down.

The Green Party of Saskatchewan takes the position that medical isotopes are too important to rely on unreliable nuclear reactors for their production.

Recently, Thomas Ruth, a research scientist at Canada’s national particle and nuclear physics laboratory called on the federal government to look into ways of delivering radioactive medical isotopes without the need for nuclear reactors. According to Ruth, using nuclear reactors to the produce medical isotopes has not been able to meet the demands of hospitals.[11]

What’s the Rush?

Considering the long period of construction (which usually takes even longer than anticipated) and the overwhelming opposition from the people of Saskatchewan who have participated in the public consultation process, this is not a decision that should be rushed into by government. So, what is the rush? Isn’t a worldwide recession an incredibly bad time to be rushing into an enormous capital project? Many people who voted for the SaskParty in the last election did not know that the Government they voted in had plans to build a nuclear reactor and a nuclear fuel waste dump in Saskatchewan. The SaskParty was not talking about these plans during the last election, and the NDP was not either. The Green Party was the only party to raise the issue of nuclear power in the last election, and although we raised the issue repeatedly, the media were not willing to talk about nuclear in their election coverage, and the other political parties avoided questions on the subject. The issue has been kept out of the public eye during the planning phase, and now that it is in the public eye, this process has been so sped up that I’m worried many people in Saskatchewan will not even know about plans to build a nuclear reactor before the government makes their decision. I continue to talk to Saskatchewan people everyday who have not heard anything about the public consultations or the government’s plans, and the consultation process is nearly over! Furthermore, why were public consultations held at a time of year that is particularly bad for both post-secondary students and farmers?

The public is calling for feasibility studies into energy conservation and renewable energy choices before any decision on the energy future of Saskatchewan is made. The mandate of the UDP was simply to look at nuclear and uranium. They did not even consider the other options. When all the options are weighed equally (including renewable energy sources and energy conservation), the high cost, environmental impact, and public safety risks of nuclear power become extremely unattractive. The nuclear debate has exposed the long overdue need for energy conservation and renewable energy in Saskatchewan.

Due to the serious conflict of interest that exists for many members of the UDP, the absence of any recognized representative of the environmental community, and the complete absence of gender balance among the members of the UDP (twelve men and no women), the findings of the UDP Report are seriously misleading and are not representative of the citizens of this province, nor are the findings of the UDP Report in the best interest of the citizens of this province.

The Green Party of Saskatchewan is calling upon the Government of Saskatchewan to immediately fund and make public independent studies on the environmental and public safety risks of uranium mining and nuclear power, and we join the people of Saskatchewan in calling for full feasibility studies into energy conservation and renewable energy technologies before any decision on the energy future of Saskatchewan is made.

The Green Party of Saskatchewan opposes the location of any nuclear fuel waste dump in Saskatchewan, and we oppose any plans to build a nuclear reactor in Saskatchewan.

[1] Source: Vision Green http://www.greenparty.ca/en/policy/visiongreen/partone#_Toc179815139

[2] See http://www.environmentaldefence.ca/reports/pdf/TarSands_TheReport.pdf
[3] This is why Harper and Wall have chosen intensity based targets for GHG emissions instead of actual reduction targets
[4] See Achieving Sustainability: Reform or Transformation? http://jpl.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/9/4/343. William E. Rees.Journal of Planning Literature, May 1995; vol. 9: pp. 343 – 361.
[5] See Achieving Sustainability: Reform or Transformation? http://jpl.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/9/4/343. William E. Rees.Journal of Planning Literature, May 1995; vol. 9: pp. 343 – 361.
[6] GPS Statement of Principles: Ecological WisdomHuman societies must operate with the understanding that we are part of nature, not separate from nature. We must maintain an ecological balance and live within the ecological and resource limits of our communities and our planet. We support a sustainable society that utilizes resources in such a way that future generations will benefit and not suffer from the practices of our generation. To this end we must practice agriculture that replenishes the soil, move to an energy efficient economy and live in ways that respect the integrity of natural systems.
[7] For more information on the KiKK study, see this summarized report at http://tekknorg.wordpress.com/2007/12/17/german-kikk-study-higher-cancer-risc-next-to-atomic-power-plants-unofficial-belarussian-children-cancer-data/.
[8] The full report can be downloaded in German at http://www.bfs.de/en/bfs/druck/Ufoplan/4334_KIKK.htm.
[9]Source: http://www.ccnr.org/isotopes.html
[10] Source: http://www.ccnr.org/isotopes.html
[11] Source: http://www.laka.org/info/publicaties/2009-heu.pdf

http://www.greenpartysask.ca/

Nuclear and uranium policy from the 2007 "Green Book":

The Green Party of Saskatchewan is opposed to nuclear power for the following reasons:

Nuclear power is fiscally unsound. The last nuclear power plant in Canada came in seven times over budget, costing $14 billion dollars. This does not include the high cost involved in decommissioning old power plants.

Nuclear waste cannot be stored, treated, or disposed of safely.

A large amount of radioactive tailings accumulate as a result of uranium mining. These tailings can leak into groundwater and affect the surrounding area, leading to increased cancer rates.

Depleted uranium ends up in weapons such as missiles and anti-tank bullets.

Nuclear power is NOT emissions free. Large quantities of greenhouse gases are produced in the mining and refining of uranium as well as during the long construction period of the power plant.

We will phase out uranium mining in Saskatchewan, compensating those affected during transition.

Green Party of Saskatchewan Nuclear / Uranium Policy Resolutions 1998-2007 (submitted and voted on by Green Party of Saskatchewan members):

1999.3. Uranium Mining: That northern Saskatchewan land claims with Aboriginal First Nations be given priority, and that a settlement giving First Nations control over northern resources be immediately negotiated. That a revenue sharing scheme between northern communities and mining companies operating in the north be immediately negotiated; if negotiations are not concluded in a timely manner, that such a scheme be legislated directly. That present environmental regulations around mining operations be aggressively monitored and enforced by Environment Department officials. That a full public inquiry be held into the end uses of Saskatchewan uranium. That provincial royalty rates on Saskatchewan mineral resources be raised to reflect the mining infrastructure costs incurred by the public over the last three decades. That taxation policy on mining companies be reviewed. That no new uranium mines be licensed to operate in this province. That present uranium mines be phased-out as new jobs are found for displaced workers.

1999.6. Nuclear Power The Green Party of Saskatchewan resolves: That no further provincial money be spent on nuclear power. The provincial government further directs all Department, Agencies and Crown Corporations to abandon any proposals to develop nuclear power programs for the Province. That the province direct all Departments, Agencies and Crown Corporations to categorically refuse to partner themselves in any way with Atomic Energy of Canada Limited (AECL). That the province pass legislation prohibiting the transportation and/or storage of nuclear reactor waste across or within provincial boundaries

2003.29. Support United Nations disarmament effortsBE IT RESOLVED that the GPS will work with other interested groups to press the federal government to present a resolution to the UN General Assembly with the following objectives:a. To empower the UN to permanently employ international teams of weapons inspectors who are mandated to search for and destroy all weapons of mass destruction found in any national territory, and who will report to the UN General Assembly any cases of non-compliance with this resolutionb. To end all cultural, economic and political ties with any nation that continues to produce or maintain within its borders biological, chemical and/or nuclear weapons.

2006.11 Opposition to Uranium/ Nuclear in SaskatchewanBe it resolved that the GPS executive reaffirm our position to strongly oppose the development of the uranium mining and nuclear industry in Saskatchewan.

2007.10 Canada’s role regarding improper use of uraniumBe It Resolved, that the Green Party of Saskatchewan will lobby the federal government to enforce the non-proliferation treaty and discontinue the illegal sale of uranium to any country that uses it for nuclear weapons or depleted uranium weapons.

Platform 2003:
A Green Party of Saskatchewan government will oppose the location of any nuclear fuel waste dump in Saskatchewan and opposes any plans to build a nuclear reactor in Saskatchewan. The mining of uranium will be quickly phased out with a just transition for affected workers. A Green Party of Saskatchewan government will hold uranium mining companies accountable for cleanup of mining sites. Exports of uranium to countries with nuclear weapons and Depleted Uranium weapons will be halted immediately.

We need more Jellos

2009-08-27T16:26:00.000-07:00

It has been five years since I first heard Jello Biafra speak on one of his political spoken word albums. He is a political activist whose message touches and inspires many to get involved and take action, including Canadians. He has spoken at many universities, including the University of Regina, Saskatchewan where I am currently a student at. At 51 years of age, Jello has come a long way since the start of his musical career, and his political career as the lead singer of the 1978-1986 punk band, the Dead Kennedys. He has stayed involved in the music scene by collaborating with many talented artists and bands. Jello is founder and owner of perhaps the longest running underground record label that is still active, Alternative Tentacles. Since 1986, he has released many political spoken word albums that have been a source of inspiration and motivation to many.

Jello Biafra was born in Boulder, Colorado. His real name is Eric Boucher. When he was five, J.F.K. was assassinated and Jello saw Lee Harvey Oswald shot live on T.V. The Vietnam War was amongst other events that convinced him to fight against corrupt governments and corporations during 1969-1972. His stage name came from the Jell-O brand name and the country of Biafra which existed for less than three years before failing its attempt to secede from Nigeria in 1970. His stage name represents the brand of mass produced food products with little nutritional value and how hundreds of thousands, maybe millions of people died of starvation when Nigeria blocked supplies from entering Biafra.

In the fall of 1979 at the age of 21, Jello ran for mayor of San Fransisco. He finished fourth out of ten candidates with 3.5% of the vote. His platform included both prank-like points such as forcing businessmen to wear clown suits, and serious points such as having police officers run for re-election with voters being residents in the neighbourhoods they patrol. He wore T-shirts to campaign in from a competing candidate's previous election. His supporters rallied with two memorable signs that said"If he doesn't win I'll kill myself" and "What if he does win?". In the 2002 DVD Dead Kennedys: The Early Years, Jello makes the following statement about his campaign for mayor of San Francisco, "For those of them who have seen my candidacy as a publicity stunt or a joke, they should keep in mind that it is no more of a joke, and no less of a joke, than anyone else they care to name." With Canada on the verge of yet another federal election, Jello carries an important message about the issues that are focused on during an election and the publicity stunts involved in campaigning.

His political career has included many challenges. He was on trial in 1986 for "distributing harmful matter" due to complaints by the Parents Music Resource Center for including a poster by Swiss surreal artist H.R. Giger entitled Landscape #XX (or Penis Landscape) with the Dead Kennedys album Frankenchrist. The case was not about the lyrics of the album. The focus was a poster that they deemed "harmful matter". The case ended in a mistrial. Jello believes the ordeal was politically motivated and that he was used as a warning to other musicians about offensive content.

While at a club in Berkeley, California in 1994, Jello was almost beaten to death by people who believed he was a sell out. The man who initially started the incident shouted, "Sellout rockstar, kick him." He spent much time in a hospital recovering. His plans for a Canadian spoken word tour and album had to be cancelled.

In 1998, Jello was sued by fellow former members of the Dead Kennedys for refusing to allow perhaps their most well known song, "Holiday in Cambodia", to be used in a Levi's Dockers commercial. He strongly disagreed with the sweatshop labour and corrupt ways of doing business of the Levi's corporation. Staying committed to his values cost him $200,000 which his other band-members took without shame.

However, the obstacles along the way seemed to have only strengthened his fight in the political world. In 2000, Jello Biafra was drafted for the Green Party presidential nomination, but was defeated by Ralph Nader. Jello has continued to be a member of the Green Party and encourages people to use their right to vote. He focuses on real issues and spreads the truth. He encourages us not to hate the media, but to become the media.

Jello Biafra is an excellent mentor for anyone interested in political activism. It has not been an easy path for him, nor is it for anyone. I hope there are others out there who will justify his injustices in the fight against corrupt governments and corporations by taking action of their own. This world would be a much better place if we had more Jellos.

Honoured!

2009-08-12T15:08:00.000-07:00

Even for a born optimist, there are admittedly days when it seems tough; when the world seems more like a cruel unfair battle that we may or may not be winning. Spending summer days leading up to my wedding fighting nuclear reactors and a nuclear fuel waste dump from being built in my beautiful home province of Saskatchewan was definitely not fair, and it was not easy either. But still, I had to persist; I'm not willing to give up on what is right even if it means difficult times and personal sacrifices. And then something comes along which makes it all worth it, which reminds me why I'm doing this and why I need to keep going. This is such a gift, and for me, this gift came recently from an independent Saskatchewan newspaper which is only in it's third edition called the Sasquatch http://sasquatchnews.com/. The article was written by Shayna Stock, Publisher. Writing is not in Shayna's job description, but she explained to me that she was writing this story for two reasons-- 1) because she still likes to write, and 2) because she felt there were some people in Saskatchewan that people ought to know about-- and I was one of those people. To say the least, I felt incredibly honoured. But the honour I felt when she told me why she was writing the story does not compare to the honour I feel seeing the finished full page profile entitled "Keen Green On the Scene", which can be viewed at the following link:

http://sasquatchnews.com/keen-green-on-the-scene/

To Shayna, I say thank-you, and keep up the writing-- you are gifted. To the Sasquatch you are living the words of my mentor, Jello Biafra who says "Become the Media". Jenn Ruddy, Editor of the Sasquatch, is not only amazingly good at what she does, she is also an incredibly gifted professor of political science. It is independent media that will save this society. We can not become informed citizens without access to important information from the media -- the most important agent of political socialization (where we get our information/values about politics from). For every story in mainstream media that only reports the half truth to the advantage of their main advertisers, there are new independent media outlets that are reporting the whole truth if you go looking for them. To subscribe to the print edition of the Sasquatch (which is well worth the $22.50/year) visit http://sasquatchnews.com/subscribe/.

Peace and Solidarity,

Larissa Shasko

Leader of the Green Party of Saskatchewan

Valley View should be kept open as long as possible, says Green Party Leader.

2009-07-15T11:46:00.000-07:00

A story in Saturday's Moose Jaw Times Herald has raised a number of concerns in my community, and I have sent a press release (below) to local media on the issue. The orginal story (that this press release is in response to) can be viewed at this link: http://www.mjtimes.sk.ca/index.cfm?sid=268458&sc=3

PRESS RELEASE

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

July 15, 2009

According to the Leader of the Green Party of Saskatchewan, Larissa Shasko, there is a disconnect between the patients at Valley View and the three advocacy groups, People First Saskatchewan, SACL, and Valley View Family Group, who recently signed an agreement to ask the Saskatchewan Government to close Valley View. During the last provincial election when she was the Green Party of Saskatchewan candidate for Moose Jaw-Wakamow, Shasko met with a group of patients at Valley View who had requested to meet with each candidate because they had heard rumours of their “home”, Valley View, being shut down. “At this meeting, the patients who were able to communicate told me all about Valley View-- what they got to do, where they got to go, how the food was (which they said was excellent, by the way), and that they liked it there. They were happy to be there, but they were really scared that they would be forced to leave their home. Valley View is their home, and we have a duty to respect that and to ask the provincial government to keep Valley View open as long as possible,” says Shasko.

“After touring Valley View and meeting with the people who live there and after talking with many people who've worked there, it is clear that the best opportunity for inclusion of the patients at Valley View in all aspects of our community is being provided to them at Valley View. Furthermore, it is my understanding that the patients of Valley View are free to go out into the community as they wish to,” continues Shasko. “They are certainly not asking to have Valley View shut down, and advocacy groups need to listen to those they are advocating on behalf of.”

Shasko says she made a commitment to the patients she met with at Valley View to work with the provincial government to keep Valley View open as long as possible, and she will be keeping that commitment. In the coming weeks and months, Shasko will be arranging meetings with the Saskatchewan Government on the issue, and she will also be requesting to meet with the three advocacy groups to encourage them to sign a new agreement-- to work with the Saskatchewan Government to keep Valley View open as long as possible and to improve the care the government currently provides to those with intellectual disabilities who are living in our communities now.

According to Shasko, the hearts of those in the advocacy groups are in the right place, but somewhere along the line, there appears to have been a disconnect between the advocacy groups and the people at Valley View they advocate on behalf of. “I encourage People First Saskatchewan, SACL, Valley View Family Group, and Premier Wall to tour Valley View and to meet with the people who live there and work there.”

Green Energy Solutions- It's time to go renewable

2009-04-30T01:21:00.000-07:00

Let's clear the record. Nuclear power will not be good for Saskatchewan's economy. It will cost us billions, and cost overruns are common practice. The Government of Ontario has a debt of $38 billion from nuclear power cost overruns-- a debt the taxpayers of Ontario are now on the hook for. Ontario residents pay an additional charge on their electriticy bills towards these nuclear cost overruns. Do you want to end up on the hook for Bruce Power's mistakes?

Nuclear will not create long term jobs, and nuclear will not help us fight climate change, especially when the electricity generated from the proposed nuclear power plant in Northern Saskatchewan would be used to power the tar sands (the world's dirtiest oil).

What will help our economy? Renewable energy technologies and energy conservation would create far more jobs than power generation from nuclear or coal would. People of Saskachewan, do you honestly feel safe investing billions of dollars into nuclear power when renewables would cost half as much as nuclear and would generate many more jobs (and jobs that would actually last)? Nuclear is an economic risk that I am not willing to take, especially in the midst of an economic recession.

Solutions: The first step is to invest in energy conservation technologies coupled with programs designed to make these technologies affordable for everyone in this province. If we make climate change solutions available only to those that can afford to pay, we won't get anywhere. Next, we go fully renewable. But this will only work if we invest proper money into a renewable grid instead of spending billions on making our grid nuclear ready. Energy conservation and renewable energy technologies are rapidly progressing as billions of dollars from China and the U.S. flow into the 'New Green Economy'. Canada is behind the times. We are definitely not stepping up to our place as world leaders when it comes to fighting climate change. We are holding the global community back with intensity based targets for greenhouse gas emissions. Think about it. This nuclear power plant would be built to provide power to the tar sands and to export power to the U.S. (and possibly Manitoba). The people of Saskatchewan do not need this power, we would just be footing the bill for infrastructure, upgrades to the grid, and who knows what else (because the SK Government won't be transparent with us).

Besides, their is only enough uranium left domestically to provide approx. 45 more years of nuclear power generation at the CURRENT rate of consumption, yet nuclear waste stays toxic for a million years, and no one has ever been able to figure out a safe way to store it.

Let's start the renewable energy discussion Saskatchewan! Let's democratize our energy and agriculture sectors.

Peace,

Larissa

The Green Party of Saskatchewan Elects Larissa Shasko as New Leader

2009-04-30T01:05:00.000-07:00

Above Image: Larissa Shasko (left) talking to Green Party supporter during the 2008 Federal election

Press Release -- April 27, 2009

Green Party of Saskatchewan held its annual general meeting last weekend in Yorkton. On the agenda was the election of a new Party Executive, policy resolutions, constitutional amendments and a presentation by keynote speaker Dr. Jim Harding concerning the raging nuclear debate in Saskatchewan. “Saskatchewan is in for both nuclear and coal; coal is needed for backup anyway,” said Dr. Harding. “We cannot solve the climate change crisis with a radioactive waste crisis. We need to leap into a renewable economy, which does not require resource extraction,” Dr. Harding continued. “The next two months of democratic activism are critical.”

Larissa Shasko, a 27 year-old student of Political Science at the University of Regina who lives in Moose Jaw is the newly elected Leader of the Green Party of Saskatchewan. Larissa Shasko has been a candidate for the Green Party three times in the past three years, twice federally in the riding of Palliser (2006 & 2008), and once provincially in the riding of Moose Jaw Wakamow (2007). She currently serves on the Green Party of Canada Federal Council and is the Young Greens of Canada Finance and Administrative Chair. “The Green Party of Saskatchewan is the only political party in Saskatchewan who stands united against nuclear,” said Shasko. “Despite flawed and biased UDP consultation processes and a complete lack of transparency from the Sask Party Government, we will fight hard to keep Saskatchewan nuclear free, and we will win,” Shasko continued.

According to Larissa Shasko, spending billions of dollars on costly nuclear power would rob Saskatchewan of the chance to go green with clean and safe energy through increased energy conservation and renewable energy technologies. “We only get one chance to fight climate change. This is our chance to go green and to go renewable,” said Shasko.

The Party passed 13 new policy resolutions and made 2 amendments to their constitution and by-laws. Policy resolutions passed at the AGM included increased energy conservation and renewable energy solutions, consumer goods packaging laws, car sharing as an alternative to ownership, and the establishment of an independent Citizens Science Council that would be charged with providing objectivity, accountability, and transparency in the researching of industry claims. Resolutions to maintain existing rail infrastructure while revitalizing and expanding the rail system for the transportation of both people and freight, as well as the construction of bike paths in cities, towns, highways, and bridges throughout Saskatchewan were also passed. “These new resolutions broaden the Green Party of Saskatchewan’s portfolio of Green Energy Solutions,” said Green Party of Saskatchewan Deputy Leader, Tory McGregor.

Moose Jaw Multiplex Referendum- February 25, 2009

2009-02-24T03:12:00.000-08:00

An Open Letter to the Citizens of Moose Jaw:

The time has come to vote, and yet there are many questions regarding the multiplex that remain unanswered.

For example, why did the Moose Jaw Chamber of Commerce send its members a letter encouraging them to vote YES on the multiplex? Isn’t a Chamber of Commerce supposed to be unbiased towards a referendum question?

Furthermore, why would Moose Jaw’s City Council continue to blindly press forward on building a new multiplex despite the start of a worldwide economic recession? Saskatchewan’s stability in the fragile economy is temporary at best. This is not a time for luxuries; this money could give our citizens so much more.

As of December 31st, 2007, the City of Moose Jaw had zero debt and no interest payments, but as of February 2009, Moose Jaw City Council has voted to borrow $63 million. Borrowing this sum will cost the City of Moose Jaw approximately $2.5 million in annual interest payments (the equivalent of a 16.25% municipal tax increase). Of the $63 million debt, $38.3 million is allocated to the multiplex, and the remainder is allocated to more pressing infrastructure upgrades.

Just think of what $38.3 million could do for the citizens of this city.

The most common argument that I hear for the multiplex is that it is progress, but exactly what is progress considered to be? Is it having paved roads that welcome tourists to our city? Is it upgrades to the hospital? Is it adding bike lanes to our streets and investing in renewable energy technology? Or is progress building a multiplex?

I am greatly concerned by the division in our community that the multiplex has created. It is hard to bring up the subject in the community because you never know if you are going to offend someone. Supporters of both sides of the issue have very strong feelings. This kind of division is not conducive to a healthy community. Has this multiplex been worth the damage it has already caused to our city?

For now, democracy will decide if we can put the multiplex behind us and begin to rebuild our community spirit instead. Moose Javians, don’t forget to vote!

Sincerely,

Larissa Shasko

Former Green Party of Canada Candidate for Palliser

Today's Youth, Tomorrow's Leader's

2009-01-13T22:55:00.000-08:00

After meeting a number of like minded youth over the past year, the following are similarities in the priorities of environmentally progressive youth I have noticed:

*We care about communities. We want to experience the caring relationships and sense of sharing that comes out of these sort of arrangements where we take care of each other. Not only are communities sustainable, they are an essential part of human nature that has been misplaced for generation X by the computer age and widely dispersed families of the modern day. We are coming together to form communities, and we are already benefitting remarkably by doing this.

*We recognize the responsibility of technology. We know that computers are a tool and must not replace people, or control our lives. We are beginning to see cell phones as a mistake for our health, the environment, and our pocket books. We know that natural is better than artificial, and that profit often overrides human rights. We may feel this way about technology as a whole because we are the generation that would have the hardest time going back to a computerless world. Technology has brought so much good to us that we recognize the importance of using and developing it responsibly.

*We are willing to change our materialistic upbringing, often drastically. It is easier to change our ways when we are still young, and since we have many years ahead of us, we feel the urgency perhaps even more than older generations do. For example, many of us have given up driving, even more of us have given up meat or are eating less of it to lower our ecological footprint, etc. We demand organic because it is healthier for our young bodies and our young minds. We are willng to live with less "things" and to replace material goods with good times and friendship.

*We know the power of freedom of speech, and we are not afraid to use it. Never has youth been so passionate about the causes we tackle. The world is finally turning green out of necessity, and today's young environmental activists will potentially see the hard work of activists from the past 30 years come to fruition in our own lifetimes. It is exciting! We are on the verge of a revolution. My generation recognizes this, and we want to fight that much harder. We see that despite all the hard work of incredible activists who came before us, things like the tar sands or palm oil plantations have not been stopped, and truthfully, we get scared by that. We feel that we must be that much braver, that much stronger, and that much louder than out predecessors. Amazing older activists will one day be passing the torch down to the younger generations, and we will be more than ready!

The Fight for Democracy in Canada

2009-01-13T22:49:00.000-08:00

This fall, I experienced just how unfair our electoral system can be. I have been a Green Party candidate three times in the last three years—twice federally and once provincially. It has become apparent that Canada is suffering from democratic bankruptcy.

Without democracy, we are not able to address climate change. The public is remote from those who make decisions in this country, and decision makers are remote from the environmental consequences of their decisions.

We must overcome the barriers of democratic bankruptcy in order to take urgent action on climate change.

With a new year comes a chance for new beginnings. I would like to invite you to help create a new beginning for this country. Let's bring back democracy!

Founding meeting of "Fair Vote Canada" - Saskatchewan Chapter
Sunday January 18th, 11:00 A.M.
Manitou Beach Hotel, (near Watrous, Saskatchewan)

If you are interested in learning more about electoral reform and standing up for democracy, please join us at the founding meeting of the Saskatchewan Chapter of Fair Vote Canada on Sunday, January 18th, 2009. This local Fair Vote chapter will be a great opportunity to foster public education on proportional representation. Carpooling is encouraged.

·According to Fair Vote Canada, the votes of 50.7% of Canadians who voted in the recent federal election elected no one.

·More than 60% of Canadians voted against the Conservatives, yet they were elected as the governing party anyway.

·In Saskatchewan, the Conservatives received 54% of the votes in the recent federal election, yet they won 94% of the seats (all but one).

Let This Be the Last Unfair Election in Canada!

Canada’s “first-past-the-post” voting system is outdated and is failing to produce results reflective of the general public. Democratic politics has evolved significantly in Canada, yet our voting system has stayed the same. Our voting system was designed for a two party system, but many political parties now represent the interests of Canadians, not just two. Canada, the U.S., and Great Britain are the only democracies in the world that do not have an electoral system of proportional representation.

While political parties with broad support across Canada are ignored by our current electoral system, political parties with dense regional support are often over-represented in Parliament. The Green Party received 7% of the votes in the recent federal election, yet they did not receive a single seat in the House of Commons. Meanwhile, the Bloc received 10% of the votes and won 50 seats. Under a system of proportional representation, the Green Party would have received 23 seats instead of zero, and the Bloc would have received 28 seats instead of 50. Our electoral system is clearly unfair. An electoral system of proportional representation would make every vote count.

Our current electoral system turns candidates and political parties into competitors instead of colleagues. Proportional representation would reduce the overly partisan nature of Parliament that tends to make cooperation difficult. An electoral system of proportional representation would encourage collaboration and compromise so that Parliament can stop fighting and can start taking action on the environment.

Supporters of all political parties stand to benefit from proportional representation. In the recent federal election, our electoral system ignored Conservative supporters in urban ridings, Liberal supporters in Alberta, NDP supporters in Saskatchewan, and Greens all across Canada. Plus, restoring democracy in Canada will be beneficial for all Canadians, especially the many young Canadians suffering from a severe case of voter apathy.

Anyone can join Fair Vote Canada at www.fairvote.ca

In solidarity,

Larissa Shasko

For Sale On eBay: Toxic Alberta Tar Sands Water Bottle

2009-01-13T12:06:00.000-08:00

Hello! What I have copied below is a press release from the Sierra Youth Coalition about a very unusual item up for auction on eBay. They did a brilliant job of writing this press release, so I have chosen to directly copy it below instead of paraphrasing. For more information about the Sierra Youth Coalition, contact Youri Cormier – National Director, Sierra Youth Coalition or visit www.syc-cjs.org.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Press Release - for immediate release. For Sale On eBay: Toxic Alberta Tar Sands Water Bottle

CAUTION! ATTENTION! ACHTUNG! CUIDADO! This product is not recommended for human, animal or plant consumption.

January 12, 2009: The Sierra Youth Coalition, Canada's largest youth environmental organization, is selling a bottle of water from the Athabasca River on eBay. Proceeds from the sale will go towards a nation-wide campaign in high schools and universities to raise awareness on the ecological and social impacts of tar sands development in Alberta. The eBay webpage can be found by typing "Tar Sands" or "Tar Sands Water" into the search bar at: www.ebay.ca.

The bottle was filled by cyclists during SYC's To The Tar Sands bike trip in 2008. The cyclists pedaled from Fort McMurray to Calgary carrying such bottles for the ride, in order to engage with people along the way, as they noticed its brown and mucky bitumen sediments. The water, which is being directly contaminated by the growing mining and extraction of bitumen from in the northern regions of Alberta, has exceptionally high levels of mercury, arsenic, and volatile organic matter. The increasingly potent cocktail has be linked to a sudden surge in rare and virulent cancers in local downstream communities.

Sierra Youth Coalition National Director, Youri Cormier, describes the eBay initiative, "The sale of bottled water is something that SYC normally advocates against, because we find it wasteful, and we regard water not as a commodity, but a human right. But what if you are living in Alberta and the oil industry has destroyed your ecosystem to that point that not buying bottled water can kill you? We decided to turn this equation around for a try. We want Canadians to know what's happening to their beautiful wild lands and rivers. We want to give someone else in Canada the opportunity to touch this water, and imagine the everyday reality of living in an impacted community. It's a touch of history, a time capsule for this decade. It's something we'll all regret in 50 years, regardless, but really, we should be regretting it and fighting it right now."

Tim Murphy, SYC member, tar sands cyclist, and editor the book Journey To The Tar Sands adds, "Once you've seen the tar sands mines, you ask yourself: what on Earth are we doing to our planet? It's the biggest industrial project in the world already, and it could grow to be the size of Florida. It produces nearly as much greenhouse gases than all the cars and trucks in Canada combined, and frankly when you reached that that point, it's time to start setting limits, saying 'no more!' and at the very least, enforcing environmental protection laws... and even that's not being done."

Recent Headlines from the Globe and Mail

2008-10-02T07:13:00.000-07:00

‘Dead Zones’ killing marine life, scientists warn: Need to halt oxygen depletion caused by fertilizer runoff and sewage outflows. The 400 marine dead zones doubles every 10 years. Fish that swim into the zones die. August 15, 2008.

Greenland ice sheet melting faster than predicted, report says: A new study warns that the Greenland ice sheet could raise sea levels three times higher than predicted. September 1, 2008

Large Arctic ice shelf breaks away, now adrift in Arctic Ocean: The 50-square-kilometre Markham Ice Shelf broke away in early August. September 3, 2008.

Oil refineries underestimate release of emissions, study says: Test facility spewed 19 times more cancer-causing benzene than it reported. September 6, 2008.

Alberta oil spill kills hundreds of birds: On top of the 500 ducks killed in April 2008 on a tar sands tailings pond, a recent conventional oil spill has killed another estimated ducks and swallows. September 10, 2008.

Oil spills far exceed forecast, study says: Oil spills off Newfoundland have already exceeded estimates even though the projects will operate up to 15 more years. September 16, 2008.

Alberta’s reluctance may doom advisory group: Government refuses to follow CEMA’s recommendations on sustainable land use. CEMA is composed of oil companies, government agencies, natives and ecological groups. It studies the environmental effects of industrial development in the tar sands. September 18, 2008.

Black clouds on the horizon for birds of the world: From field sparrows to boreal chickadees, 20 of the most common species in North America are being decimated, report warn. September 23, 2008.

Humanity at risk: Are the males going first? The percentage of males being born is dropping, virility and fertility are down, testicular cancer is up. Scientists say males are more vulnerable than females to pollutants while in the womb. September 20, 2008.

World’s Shark and ray species at risk: Of 21 species surveyed, three-quarters are in danger due to overfishing. May 23, 2008.
World biodiversity drops by one-third: In the past 35 years worldwide biodiversity has dropped almost one-third due mainly to habitat loss. May 16, 2008.

We need a government whose first priority is taking immediate action on climate change! We must ensure that future generations do not pay the price for Canada's poor environmental record. We have to learn to cooperate and work together if we are going to make the necessary changes. Give us a future by protecting our environment now!

Our children deserve no less- the costs of nuclear outweigh the benefits.

2008-09-09T02:04:00.000-07:00

We must never forget about the consequences of our actions today on future generations, especially not when nuclear power is involved.

I just answered the following comment on a recent blog post of mine:

"Larissa, I agree with most of the positions that have been articulated by the Green Party. But I am particularly troubled by your dislike of nuclear energy. Nuclear, is, by no means, an optimal energy source, but in terms of radioactive pollution and radioactive waste, it is light years ahead of coal. If a nuclear reactor was proposed for the Moose Jaw area (at Lake Diefenbaker) to replace highly pollutting coal-fired power plants at Estevan or Coronach, would you be for or against such a development?"

There is unfortunately a lot of controversy with the nuclear issue, so I have posted my answer below for others:

At the current rate of usage without building any new nuclear power plants, we would be out of domestic uranium in 40 years! With the soaring price of uranium (approx. $10/pound in the 1990's to appprox. $170/lb these days) and with industry making false claims that nuclear is green, many new plants are proposed around the world and five new plants in Canada as well.

Each gigawatt of nuclear energy requires 170 tonnes of uranium. When the uranium is processed into fuel, 250,000 tonnes of carbon are emitted for every 1000 megawatts produced. Nuclear energy produces huge amounts of greenhouse gases. There is no safe way to store the radioactive waste produced. Nuclear waste stays toxic for one million years! It is highly carcinogenic, and so are the routine emissions of nuclear power plants.

Consider the following information quoted below:

"The KiKK study commissioned by the Federal Office for Radiation Protection in Germany and made public on December 10th 2007 examined cancer rates in young children between 1980 and 2003. It showed a 60% increase in solid cancers and a 117% increase in leukemia among children up to five years of age living within 5 km of 16 German nuclear reactors. It also found a 20-40% increase for all cancers in children living within a 50 km radius of the plants. These nuclear power plants were operating under normal conditions, with radiation releases well within levels allowed for civilian populations."

I just lost my seventeen year-old cousin to cancer. When are we going to start taking responsibilty for our actions and start addressing any known causes of this cancer epidemic?! I have to represent our party's position on nuclear strongly, for Jen.

The quoted info above continues:

"The new evidence from Germany of an association between increased cancers and proximity to nuclear facilities raises difficult questions. Should pregnant women and young children be advised to move away from them? Should local residents eat vegetables from their gardens? And, crucially, shouldn't those governments around the world who are planning to build more reactors think again?"

I do not support and can not support a nuclear power plant being built in Saskatchewan, especially nearby. I hope you won't--can't, either.

As for coal, leave it in the ground! The health consequences from coal are completely awful too, and the effects to the environment from coal are HORRIBLE! That is why we must shift away from non-renewable resources (like uranium) and make the transition to a healthy, just and sustainable energy future.

All of Canada's uranium is mined in Saskatchewan, and 85% of it is exported to the U.S. In a recent book on the war in Afghanistan by Jack Warnock, he writes the following:

"Depleted uranium (DU) is produced during the uranium enrichment process. The U-235 used to produce fuel for reactors that generate electricity is removed, leaving the U-238 isotope. The remaining material is extremely dense and increases the penetration capability of weapons; it is used in the warheads of missiles and bombs. On impact the shell, with its uranium and traces of americium and plutonium, vaporizes, generating very tiny particles of radioactive dust. When this is inhaled it stays in the body, emitting radiation. The DU used in US weapons comes from the uranium mines in Saskatchewan.

Thousands of DU bombs and missiles have been used by US forces in the Afghan and Iraq wars. A typical bunker bomb contains 1.7 tons of depleted uranium."

I shudder to think of what we have done to the health of too many inncocent civilians in Afganistan, most of which are women and children. We all deserve a chance at a healthy life. This is not the legacy that I want Saskatchewan to have. We can't control the uranium mined here once we ship it south of the border. Nuclear is an international security threat and is destroying ecosystems too.

Plus, Saskatchewan's uranium is mined using dirty coal in Texas. How does this make nuclear better than coal? NEITHER should be an option, especially when we have more wind and solar power generating capacity than anywhere else in the world, right here in Saskatchewan!

I am a young women. I have to think of future generations. If I don't, who will? Certainly not Harper!

Can nuclear power meet our energy needs and be the solution to climate change? Not when one considers the cost, pollution and threat to global security associated with nuclear power.The Green Party believes that choices should be economically rational. The best energy choices to respond to the climate crisis should be those that deliver the greatest reduction of GHG per dollar invested. By this criterion, nuclear energy is among the very worst options. Reactors cost billions of dollars, take more than a decade to build, operate unreliably after about the first dozen years of operation, and only produce one type of energy: electricity. Even if the industry were “green and clean” as claimed by the pro-nuclear propaganda efforts, it fails on the economics. Nevertheless, it is neither clean nor green.

I'm sorry that we can not support nuclear to appease your opinion, but I can not lie to yourself or others about this issue. I am too honest by nature, and our children deserve no less.

Peace and Solidarity,

Larissa Shasko