Go to article index for other editions of Bob Orrick's IN RE (In the Matter of).
Assisted Suicide, Marijuana and Kyoto Accord
By
Bob Orrick
Today, we're going to throw some statistics at you to mull over, kick around and generally chew into tiny pieces before spitting out in disgust.
First, Canadian seniors support legally assisted suicide. A poll on this web site shows that 23 per cent of respondents favour legally assisted suicide while 22 per cent condemn it as illegal. The greatest margin, however, is 52 per cent who support the idea/practice provided it is restricted to terminally ill patients. Two per cent had no opinion.
What can we learn from these figures? For starters, three-quarters of Canadian seniors - based on the poll results - favour assisted suicide. That is an overwhelming margin and ought to mean something to Ottawa and the provincial capitals. It shows, rather clearly, that Canadian seniors see merit in ending the life of someone who is terminally ill or who wants to end his/her life for whatever reason. The reasons must be, one assumes, serious and reasonable and not frivolous or at the whim of family members who want to be rid of granny or grandpa.
I, for one, am a bit sceptical about the entire idea of suicide, assisted or not and favour medical research over hasty 'let's end the affair' decisions. I am not so crass as to suggest that financial gain might be the root of the decision to end one's life; but others have broached the idea at different times.
Second, another poll revealed that Canadian seniors favour the legal possession of marijuana in Canada. Fully 43 per cent voted yes to the question "Are you in favour of legalised marijuana possession in Canada?" while 37 per cent said no. An additional 17 per cent approved possession of marijuana for medical reasons only. What do the poll results tell us?
At first blush, it appears that Canadian seniors are in favour of getting high on a weed that Ottawa says is an illegal substance. How else to explain the nearly half of the respondents' yes vote? On further examination, the vote might be an indication that seniors are 'growing soft' as they age and are less inclined to see mere possession as a serious crime. Perhaps, seniors have come round to the idea that far too much time and effort - not to mention taxpayer money - is spent currently by authorities trying to ferret out 'grow ops' and simple sales on street corners. Perhaps, but that is not a convincing argument.
It has been written numerous times by experts in the field that marijuana - considered a soft drug - is harmless and leads to nothing more than a 'high,' an euphoric feeling that tends to raise the user above the humdrum of everyday life and is worthy of being legalised, is flawed logic. Drugs are harmful and no amount of 'explanation' can justify legalising marijuana use. Soft drugs tend to lead to hard drugs and hard drugs tend to open the door to crime. Rather than legalise marijuana use in Canada, why not legislate stiffer penalties for trafficking in drugs? If stiffer penalties were imposed - with confiscation of all material things the trafficker possess plus a heavy fine - it might lead to less demand for soft drugs as the entry point for the hard drugs. Then again, it might not. Canadian seniors seem to favour the legalisation of marijuana perhaps because as youngsters they used the foul substance or perhaps because they have no more fight left in them and want only to get on with life. Perhaps, perhaps, perhaps. The floor is open to debate.
Finally, the editorial board of the Calgary Herald has published a full-page "letter to the country" on the Kyoto Accord. The gist of the letter is that the Kyoto Accord, if implemented in Canada, will cost Canadians upwards of 450,000 jobs [Canadian Manufacturer's Association] and have serious consequences on all parts of the country. For example, the editorial board states, "You will almost certainly pay more tax and more for energy. Some of you will lose your jobs, or never find one if you are about to enter the labour force. Ontario and Quebec manufacturing sectors get 40 per cent of the money spent on machinery, equipment and services in Fort McMurray; when a project is cancelled in Alberta, steelworkers in Hamilton go home."
Those are rather convincing words and ought to make Canadians coast to coast to coast sit up and take notice. For far too long Canadians have zeroed in on Alberta as the culprit and have pointed fingers at the province and accused it of dragging its feet on the Kyoto Accord. Clearly, Albertans have done their homework whereas Ottawa - mostly in the person of Jean Chretien - has not.
While the idea of losing one's job or not finding that all-important first one might not seem too important to seniors who are retired and living off a pension or two or RRSPs, the claim that taxes will rise and energy costs will move upwards, should ring alarm bells. Seniors on fixed incomes cannot afford to pay more taxes - gad, we pay enough now - nor afford to see home heating costs rise. Not mentioned but certainly to be considered, will be the increase in gasoline or diesel fuel that translates into higher travel costs. Buses and aeroplanes and ships and other forms of transportation will cost more. Can seniors afford the Kyoto Accord?
An editorial in the Vancouver Sun put it into another form, the Kyoto Accord is projected to cost the average Canadian $2,200 in disposable income to pay for tax or borrowing needed to implement the Accord. Can Canadians afford the Kyoto Accord? Again, the floor is open to debate.
Bob Orrick is a private tutor of English grammar, literature, poetry and Canadian history to off-shore youngsters. His pupils hail from such places as Taiwan, China, Japan, Hong Kong, Korea and Venezuela. He was previously in international marketing, was a ministerial assistant to a provincial cabinet minister, spent a few years as a reporter then editor of a community newspaper and enjoyed a career in the Royal Canadian Navy.
Advertising Information 
