The last week’s been interesting, news-wise. Two issues in particular have poked at my rant gland and today seems like a good day for sharing.
(rant gland?? Is there such a thing?).
Rant #1: the G-20 summit. Or rather, the G-20 security budget.
For those of you not living in
In the past week it's come to light that the security bill for the G-20 summit is currently at $800 million. Yes, you heard that right (saw that right?). $800 million. Forecast to be $1.2 billion when all’s said and done, although of course it could go higher. I guess those sound cannons are a tad expensive...
One. Billion. Dollars.
And this is the point where I yet again started to wonder when the Harper government is going to collapse. They’ve run roughshod over existing legislation - this is a government that passed a Bill mandating fixed election dates every four years, then called an election in the middle of their first term. They have prorogued Parliament twice, the second time for no reason whatsoever except perhaps to delay uncomfortable questions into the Afghan detainees debacle, have essentially told aids groups to "shut up", have decimated funding to women's programs, cut the court challenges program and are messing with aids oversees. Yet are perfectly happy spending $1 billion of taxpayers’ money on security for an event that when it was held in
What else might $1 billion buy? And when are we going to kick him out?
Rant #2: woman's right to have nice view six months a year vs. property owners’ right to renovate.
A couple buys a home in an older area of
In general, this annoys me. Here's someone who's gone through all the entire process, carefully checking to make sure that the property they want to buy is not a heritage building and yet a neighbor who really likes the view half of the year can derail their plans completely. I live in the oldest neighbourhood in
However, it gets even more interesting. The reason these people want to build a new home is because the wife is a paraplegic and needs an accessible home so she can live with her family again. Not surprisingly, I'm on their side, but it should be said that I am also on the side of a heritage buildings - after all, I fully understand the importance of preserving historical buildings, as my neighbourhood is currently being destroyed by insane development. However, this couple followed protocol, made sure the house was not designated a heritage building, are now the owner of that property and as such, I don't think it should be permitted for a group of "concerned residents" who don't want there to be a different looking house on their street to force the issue. Where’s the fairness? Or logic, even?
And here's where it gets beyond mere squabbling and into revealing depth of character (or lack thereof). Because although the neighbour across the street claims to appreciate the family's challenges, she believes that the husband has somehow “used” the wife's disability to win support. Considering that they were building an accessible home because she has a disability, I think perhaps it’s reasonable to include this fact as part of your argument, but maybe that's just me? And then, the neighbour, this paragon of human virtue says with a smile "I don't have a disability. Sorry. If I did, maybe I could use that, too."
And this is where my rant escalates to such a level that I no longer have words. Feel free to add yours in the comments.