[All] Strategic Plan consultation: the most shameful and stupidest I've ever attended.
Gregory C. Michalenko
gcmichalenko at uwaterloo.ca
Wed Feb 23 15:30:44 EST 2011
Re: Waterloo strategic plan consultations. I went last night -- and walked out. We were put in small groups - only 4 in mine. We talked productively about our visions and hopes for Waterloo for about an hour, and then each of the 3 groups gave short summaries. Before there was any chance for us to comment on the ideas coming from the other groups, the hired consultants swung into action. We were each handed a gizmo that looked like a remote control for a tv. Then they started explaining that we were to compare the "6 pillars" (eg, environment, economic) of the strategic plan to each other. Since there were 6 pillars, that made 15 possible combinations (eg 1+2, 1+3, 1+4...3+4, 3+5 etc.). The gizmo allowed us to pick which of each pair we favoured and rank on a score of 1-10. And instantly it all would get added up and we would know what mattered most! I put up my hand and asked what that was supposed to prove: they cut us off from productive group interaction and were reducing us to individuals in a secret ballot voting at the same time for something and against another. I mentioned how the School Board at a big public consultation after the Harris cuts tried to do the same thing: they tried to lure 200 people by giving each of us 3 votes to select our favourite things from a list of about 20 (eg, outdoor ed, special ed, music) so that they would know what to cut. I spoke out and said that we needed all these things in an educational system, and chopping any of them would be like hacking off the leg or ears or liver of a body and expecting it to still function. Now we were doing the same thing again. The consultants just bulldozed me aside and kept on going. I walked out and was joined by only one other person.
So if you go - don't be afraid to challenge such shenanigans. Insist that you came to talk together and interact, not generate a bunch of numbers using gee-whiz technology. Tell them that this is not public consultation but a shell game, and they should be ashamed of themselves
- Greg Michalenko
aFrom: all-bounces at gren.ca [all-bounces at gren.ca] on behalf of Louisette Lanteigne [butterflybluelu at rogers.com]
Sent: Wednesday, February 23, 2011 2:48 PM
To: all at gren.ca
Subject: [All] Strategic Plan, Nuclear not profitable and Tar Sands update
Hello folks
Here's the latest
Waterloo Strategic Plan
Tonight is the last evening where Waterloo residents can participate in a workshop regarding the Strategic Plan. The meeting starts at 6:30 at Forbes room at RIM Park.
Nuclear still not profitable
After 50 years, Nuclear power still relies heavily upon subsidies. The industry is still not economically viable according to a report released today by the Union of Concerned Scientists. (UCS). To view the press release and the link to the report visit here:
http://www.ucsusa.org/news/press_release/nuclear-power-subsidies-report-0504.html
Europe & Tar Sands update
The European Union is rejecting the Tar Sands oil saying it would circumvent their efforts to reduce emissions. They knew that Canada may challenge them at the World Trade Organization if they took this stance so prior to doing so the European Commission conducted their own analysis and published the data showing how dirty Tar Sands oil really is. That report is published on line here:
http://ec.europa.eu/clima/studies/transport/fuel/index_en.htm
The issue is said to be threatening the European Free Trade deal:
http://ca.reuters.com/article/domesticNews/idCATRE71K2FL20110221?feedType=RSS&feedName=domesticNews
Currently the EU is on the verge of approving a law that aims to cut the carbon pollution from vehicles: the Fuel Quality Directive as seen in this PDF: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2009:140:0088:0113:EN:PDF
This legislation will result in suppliers of petrol, diesel and gas oil reducing emissions of greenhouse gas by 2020 but the Canadian government is lobbying heavily to change the legislative text and undermine EU's climate policy in an effort to promote Tar Sands oil. The World Wildlife Fund has a quick sign petition to address this issue to help keep Tar Sands oil out of Europe. Here's the link:
http://wwf.panda.org/how_you_can_help/campaign/ac_detail.cfm?ActionUrl=http://buffy.bluegecko.net/action/c489daab-6f4f-49fb-804c-96028eb782f1
Meanwhile, several prominent scientists are still demanding further studies for toxins in Alberta. http://www.edmontonjournal.com/business/Potent+toxins+need+studied/4309179/story.html
That's it for now.
Lulu :0)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://gren.ca/pipermail/all_gren.ca/attachments/20110223/fa3f8873/attachment.html>
More information about the All
mailing list