The following text may have been generated by Optical Character Recognition, with varying degrees of accuracy. Reader beware!

P THE OAKVILLE BEAVER Mar. 23, 1994 Tan Oliver : | SS mt oys ont at d ng newspapers which includes: Ajaxâ€"Picker News Advertiser, Barrie Advance, Brampto Guardian, Burlington Post, “r%omecflon Etobicoke Guardian, Georgr:g Independent/ Acton Free Press, Kingston This Week, Lindsay This Week, Markham Economist and Sun, Stouffvilie/Uxbridge Tribune, Milton Canadian Champion, Mississauga News, Newmarketâ€"Aurora Eraâ€"Banner, North York Mirror, Oakville Beaver, Ofillia Today, wa/Whithy This Week, Peterborough This Week, Richmond HiVThomhilWaughan Liberal, Scarborough Mirror. / t All material published in the Beaver is protected by copyright. reproduction in Circulation: 845â€"9742 or 845â€"9743 whole or in part of this material is strictly forbidden without the consent of the publisher. is accepted on the condition that, in the event of a typographical error, that portion of the advertising space occupied by the erroneous item, together with a reasonable allowance for si re, will not be charged for, but the balance of the advertisement will be paid for at h rate. The publisher reserves the right to categorize and reject advertising. in homo"ypog:hedm. nmenggoodsorm?finwwm. goods or services maymwld.AMng is merely an offer to sell and may be withdrawn ulugyul"’m. THE OAKVILLE BEAVER 467 Speers Road, Oakville, Ont. L6K 3S4 845â€"3824 Fax: 845â€"3085 Classified Advertising: 845â€"2809 Robert Glasbey Advertising Director Norman Alexander Editor Geoff Hill Circulation Director Teri Casas Office Manager Tim Coles Production Manager ~OPINION _ EpiToRIAL _ Thinking positive It's nice to mark the start of spring with some good economic news for a the change. And in Oakville, that news comes on different fronts but the result is the same...positive signs that the economy is on the mend. The first piece of good news came Friday at the Lear Seating plant which is to supply seats for Ford‘s new Windstar van. The Ontario government, through its jobsOntario scheme, has kicked in $1.6â€"million to help train workers in the plant. This support was just one of the reasons Lear chose Oakville and Canada to open a new plant. When producâ€" tion reaches its maximum level, some 300 people will be employed by the Winston Business Park facility. The province has also given Lear a $2.5â€" million loan for the construction and equipping of the plant. And that means more people paying taxes, buying goods and buoying up the economy. And this week representatives of 11 Oakville businesses will be in Mexico to take part in ‘Canada Expo ‘94‘ to show the kinds of goods and services Canadians have to offer the huge Mexican market. The smallâ€"toâ€"medium size firms are as diverse as Canada. From fashion to mining machinery, they‘ll all be there to try and tap the export market. This kind of aggressive marketing is just the kind of thing that business must have to survive and prosper in this hyperâ€"competitive age. Fool‘s game What a surprise? Ontario Premier Bob Rae, fresh from a brief sojourn HOLD OFF ON THAT LAST NAL, | > FLOYD _ â€" P to the Sunshine State, wants to know how his cabinet ministers are going to find another $2â€"billion in cuts. Rae is in this mess because tax revenues have been $2â€"billion less than expected. One of the reported ‘solutions‘ to this cash shortfall, is to further cut funding to school boards and hospitals. Now that‘s really progressive, especialâ€" ly from a New Democratic government. Can you imagine the outrage if our Bob was Opposition leader at Queen‘s Park? Also up for discussion is the reduction of welfare payments that are the highest in the country. So let‘s see if we‘ve got this right. The province wiped hundreds of millions of dollars of revenue off the books by lowering the cigarette tax, which was, fairly, a user tax. It also caved in to National Basketball Association blackmail by cancelling a lucrative sports lottery that brought in millions...again, this was a kind of user tax, if you didn‘t play, you didn‘t have to pay. So now all Ontarians will be looking at more cuts to services, services their tax dollars pay for, to pay for bad government management. And we‘ll ALL be paying and paying and paying. Once again, it illustrates the paucity of brainpower at Queen‘s Park. Once again, we see how a government that got itself into massive debt through borâ€" rowing, will further lengthen the recovery period for a onceâ€"proud province. If smokers got relief, what about the average Ontario taxpayer? Again, they get kicked in the teeth and again we say...cut income taxes, free up the flow of cash and the economy will take care of itself. In tying up everâ€"more masses of cash to service a runaway debt is a fool‘s game...and in the current regime, we‘ve got just the players for the game. The Oakville Beaver welcomes your comments. All letters must be signed and include the writer‘s address and phone number. Letters should be typed, doubleâ€"spaced and addressed to: Letters to the Editor, The Oakville Beaver, 467 Speers Rd., Oakville, Ont. L6K 3S4 The Chaifter clorified Dear Sir: M. A. Miller‘s letter of March 16th clearly misrepresents Pierre Trudeau‘s position on the Charter‘s notwithstanding clause. The overâ€" ride provision was anathema to Mr. Trudeau‘s strong belief that Charter Federal bureaucracy needs major Dear Sir: Every year about this time, an expensive ritual takes place in Ottawa. Federal bureaucrats, facing the end of the govâ€" emment‘s fiscal year, go into a spending frenzy to use up whatever remains of their yearly budget. If they were to show a surplus by year‘s end, their budget might be reduced next year. This waste of tax dollars is made even worse because the country faces a very real debt crisis driven by overâ€"spending. The problem is not that bureaucrats are inherâ€" ently bad people. They are merely responding to the wrong incentives built into the system. Senior bureaucrats are paid according to the size of their budgets and how many bureaucrats work for them. If we want different results, the incentives in the system must be changed. Fortunately, there is a proven method for accomplishing this. It can be accomplished by transforming govâ€" ernment functions into semiâ€"autonomous units. These units are told in detail what their jobs are, given a fixed budget and told to get on with their jobs. Their CEOs report directly to a minister, not through a smothering blanket of bureaucracy. To encourage the efficient use of their budgets, the units are allowed to keep as bonuses, half of any savings which they may achieve through their operations. The other half will be returned to the government. In other words, these units operate with builtâ€"in incentives much like private companies performâ€" ing government work under contract. A price and . performance standard would be set and it would be up to each unit to innovate and decide how best to perform the agreedâ€"upon work. This method to improve bureaucratic efficienâ€" cy has already been successfully introduced in the United Kingdom, where these civil service units are called agencies. + There are now about 90 such agencies operatâ€" ing in Britain and they employ about half of the British civil service. By the end of the decade, it is expected that a full 75 per cent of the civil service will be moved into agencies. To date, the record of these agencies has been impressive. Indeed, a study found that of the 26 financial performance targets the government set, 20 had been met or bettered. Of 38 efficiency tarâ€" gets, 28 had been met or bettered. Canadian civil servants could match this record of achievement too. It‘s time our politicians gave them a chance and were they to do so, taxpayers would be the winners. David Somerville President, The National Citizens‘ Coalition Local trustee on the right track in seeking education changes Dear Sir: Re: Trustee finds costâ€"cutting no easy task... I woke up one morning recently only to hear that Canadians are secâ€" ond to France in the amount of taxes paid by taxpayers and that Canada is currently the seventh richest country on a world scale. ...and now I read that the 10 costâ€"cutting proposals put forward by school trustee John Scheel ".. . fall on deaf ears...". Well, at least now I can understand why Canada‘s taxpayers are number two... Cuz we try harder!! I know John Scheel, he happens to be my neighbor and I know since becoming Ward 3 trustee he has rufâ€" fled a few feathers at the Halton Board of Education (in fact, with all that "ruffing," I‘m surprised no one has made a down comforter yet!) Here is a person whose only goal is to improve the educational system by challenging the ‘status quo,‘ to increase efficiencies, trying to strengthen areas of weakness, all in an effort to maximize the education each and every student is entitled too. It seems to me that every trustee we vote in should have this credo. After all, isn‘t this their primary purpose? Now, to the article in question. Out of 10 proposals only two were mildly supported, monitoring student transportation and lower attendance courses. AND this required having to urge administration to do so!!! Tokenism?! This is then followed by a defensive statement regarding the optimization of student transportaâ€" tion. So, why even partially support student transportation at all if after what Bob Williams believes is to be true? Unless, of course, there is room for improvement and this is a face saving manoeuvre. On to VP‘s and department heads in the classroom. Why not? Universities have department chairâ€" persons lecturing and acting as adviâ€" sors for undergraduate and postâ€"gradâ€" uate students alike. They seem to maintain their administrative and academic responsibilities. All this without the added benefit of a sumâ€" mer break. Administration. Well, what can be said about this? If this has been stripped of all redundancy and is operating at efficiencies that would rival profit oriented corporations, then I will concede this point. It seems to me that with today‘s advancement in office technology, especially since graduating high school in ‘75, it would be safe to /r Pn T THE BEAVER â€" assume that we are accomplishing more with less. Unfortunately, I do not know the details of John‘s 10 proposals. However, to miss on all 10 would either suggest that Bob Williams Co. are against anything that might rock the boat or that John Scheel is not on the right track and therefore should not be in the position of Ward 3 trustee. I for one do not believe the latter is true. In fact, past and present comâ€" ments in the Beaver suggest to me that John‘s approach to the Board‘s problem(s) might be a little too direct for a lot of people‘s liking. Comments such as: "It‘s a big ship and we have to turn it around ... it‘s tough when you take an adversarial approach" (Burlington Trustee Linda Glover). What the heck does this mean? Regarding the philosophical nature of John‘s proposals, what does philosophy have to do with it? If a portion of these proposals appear to SPEAK YOUR MIND Got a gripe? Give us a call. Readers are invited to express their opinion on a topic of their choice by calling 845â€"5585, box 5250. All callers are allowed 45 secâ€" onds to express their opinion and must provide their name, address and phone number for verification. A cross section of the responses will be published in next Wednesday‘s Oakville Beaver. be proactive, i.e. no immediate savâ€" ings for the 1994 budget, then it is painfully obvious that most of the decision making is more kneeâ€"jerk reaction than visionary. Even a ‘big ship‘ with a qualified captain requires advanced navigation to make its turn. I voted for John because I knew if anyone had the right stuff it was him. With his extensive background in . business, I figured it‘s prime time to have someone of his calibre, who is not shy to present what may otherâ€" wise be radical ideas for the Halton Board of Education... AND if we‘re not careful we could lose such an asset due to the frustration factor of having to deal with bureaucracy and wannabe bureaucrats. I realize that basing my thoughts and comments on what is printed in the Beaver may expose myself to later criticisms, but the takeâ€"home message is that an experienced busiâ€" ness person presented 10 ideas to cut costs and to improve our education system and not one was (willingly?) accepted. This person has gained notoriety purely on the basis of trying to do the best job as Ward 3 trustee and I for one trust John Scheel to deliver the goods. As for Ms Siebert‘s comment, you have heard my voice and it is saying take advantage of this resource (John Scheel), listen to what he has to say and try to be open to ideas that may provide solutions to the problems we face today and tomorrow. Brett S. Davis rights should apply equally to all Canadians. Indeed, to blame him for its inclusion is to engage in historical revisionism. In fact, the provision initially surfaced during the tense first minisâ€" ters‘ conference held in September 1980. Seeking a wholesale transfer of powers from Ottawa to the provinces, the premiers included a blanâ€" ket override in the soâ€"called Chateau Consensus reached on September 12th. This long list of demands symbolized the irreconcilable differâ€" ences between the federal and provincial camps. On the one hand, the premiers viewed Canada in terms of Joe Clark‘s community of communitiesâ€"a compact of the provinces. On the other, Mr. Trudeau felt that Canada was far greater than the sum of its partsâ€"a nation sustained by the will of all the people. Shortly after the failed conference ended, the federal government decided to proceed unilaterally with patriation. On Oct. 6, 1980, a constitutional resolution was introduced in the House of Commons which contained no override provision whatsoever. It was supported in principle by both Ontario and New Brunswick. Two weeks later, the Gang of Eight dissident premiers agreed to challenge the federal initiative in the Newfoundland, Quebec and Manitoba Courts of Appeal. In turn, this led to the Supreme Court Patriation Reference. On Sept. 28, 1981, the court ruled that while unilateral patriation was technically legal, it violated a constitutional convention requiring provincial consent. In other words, the high court was strongly urging both sides to make concessions. With no choice but to return to the barâ€" gaining table, Mr. Trudeau convened a first ministers‘ conference for Nov. 2, 1981. Three days of extensive negotiations led to an agreement between Ottawa and nine provinces. It included a somewhat wateredâ€"down notwithstanding clause. Minority language education rights and mobiliâ€" ty rights could not be encroached upon. As well, legislation passed under this provision would expire in five years. Given the pressing cirâ€" cumstances, Mr. Trudeau reluctantly accepted the override in exchange for a reduced list of provincial demands. Miller‘s condemnation of the override is fully justified. Although, invoked only three times since 1982, it still represents a threat to Charter rights. Perhaps greater confidence in the Charter‘s inherent safeâ€" guards eventually will result in its abandonment. Peter Pellier WEEKLY FOCUS Respondents .. Unusual setting 84% ' ]Pfc"i\./a.caiivéclothin'g 76%} M.F. Wiebe