“For a Better North America”

“A voice of reason expressing effective and workable solutions for Humans, their Business & Governments”

“THIS IS THE WEB SITE THAT EXPRESSES AND REPRESENTS ‘The Public Interests’  A ROLE THAT “Should be filled by Government”

The Council Advocacy “For a Better North America” was formed during 1987 as a private owned and operated Company, self-funded, apolitical and non-profit.  Recognized as one of North Americas highest prestige but lowest profile groups submitting impartial commentary to levels of Government and to Business, on a host of important and topical issues, ranging from the Economy, Law Reforms, Labor/Management/Employment Standards reform, Ethics & Civil Advocacy.

 

We retain the distinction as a private group to be able to facilitate prompt, flexible and efficient responsiveness to issues.  We boast a leading-edge, pro-active and informed group of “individuals” whom dwell heavily upon our strong sense of values, ethics, integrity, impartiality combined with a keen Business sense that is action-oriented, results-oriented and demanding of colleagues seeking excellence.

We solicit positions on a wide ranging number of topics, we assess the merits and then formulate into various submissions and proposals to applicable levels of Government or Business; we discourage ideological inspired approaches; we advocate innovative, intuitive and cohesive approaches combining the strengths, as needed, of “Regulation, Deregulation, Centralization & Decentralization” recognizing neither is a panacea unto itself; we tailor all approaches with empathy to know and understand consequences of our actions, we display compassion and courage to do what is right, not just expedient; we demand commitment and proven leadership qualities.  We are well known and respected for our forthright, honest and persistent approach, our unswerving dedication to our Country and the People, without prejudices or bias – equality for all.  We frown heavily upon the indifference we witness in Government and Business, upon the moribund state some leaders place their government into, the polarization created and equally so, the arrogance, autocratic style and patronage some engage in, which is purely counterproductive to goals and objectives of a prospering Country.

George F. Evens, Chair & Chief Executive Officer of The Council Advocacy brings over 35+ years of progressive senior/executive committee management experience and concurrently since 1982 owner/operator of a potpourri of family owned/operated business and partnership ventures in business, to this role.  A dedicated, ethical, altruistic person, known for his Herculean energy and ‘persistence’, informal management style and being approachable to all levels of society.

The Council Advocacy “For a Better Canada” can be reached Monday thru Friday, between the hours 9:00 am to 4:00 pm. email thecounciladvocacy@shaw.ca

• The Council Advocacy

PROPOSALS TO GOVERNMENT

Since 1987 The Council Advocacy has made numerous submissions to levels of Government on a host of topical issues.  Recent topics have included the following submissions that are consolidated for convenience and listed for ‘reference’ purposes only. The Council Advocacy will resubmit a document if requested by Federal or Provincial Governments & will return via e.mail, at the earliest opportunity:

A.  PAPERS – containing a wide ranging number of observations and perceived solutions to dilemmas being faced in North America.  Submitted to levels of Government to hopefully stimulate some positive thinking, innovative approaches, effective and workable solutions to be undertaken:

1. Thinking Papers Series:

a). Part one March 25, 1999 – Justice for all

b). Part two May 1, 1999 – Animal Cruelty

c). Parts 3 – 5 June 1, 1999 – Law Reform, Food Safety, Multiculturalism, Tradition, Human Rights

d). Parts 6 – 9 July 1, 1999 – Media, Municipal Councils, The Council mandate, Potpourri

e). Part 10 Feb. 1, 2001 – Revisiting the future, Becoming a part of the solution, a “Report Card after 5 years”.

2. Homelessness in Canada Paper Series:

a). Part one Nov. 2, 2001 – Cooperation between Countries

b). Part two Dec. 04, 2001- Commentary

c). Part three Dec. 11, 2001 – “At the brink”

B. CONCEPTS & IDEAS – outlines of some goals Government should embark upon to stimulate the economy, place more disposable income in the hands of the electorate.  Two important notions come into play, first, “economic recovery and progress is largely externally influenced but local government can seek to create environments conducive to welcoming new business, employment and subsequent prosperity”.  Second, more disposable income in the hands of growing numbers of the electorate will create needed stability and some assurance about continued employment prospects, that without such confidence, the required levels of spending will not materialize to the extent needed to strengthen the economy.  It needs to be recognized that it is the “lower and middle income earner” that is the major catalyst to spending, not the “upper level income earner”, thus, significant attention and motivation needs to be conveyed upon this large group.  It follows, unemployment is counterproductive to strong economic recovery, thus, any entity contributing to this unemployment is seen as a major threat to the economy.  It follows, increased spending will stimulate profits attainment, create new employment, create revenue to government via income taxes but also, the many fees for services and property taxes achieved by increased spending; that the small business is a major “engine of economic gains” it can all be lost or delayed by fear of unemployment or actual increasing unemployment itself; that perceived unemployment statistics are in fact folly that until actual counts of unemployment, those exceeding payment duration of income assistance or not qualifying for Social Assistance, those living on borrowed monies, credit card charges, extensions on mortgages, once paid in full or near paid, that we start to recognize the true immensity of unemployment in North America.  Some basic concepts we advocate to deal with creating more disposable income, remedying homelessness in North America include:

1. Federal Tax reforms to increase personal tax exemptions to $ 15,000.00

2. Retain lower interest rates on Mortgages and decrease Credit Card Interest

3. No GST on Lawyer or Accountant fees under $ 5,000.00

4. Tax deductible interest on mortgages up to $ 150,000.00

5. Increase tax deductible revenue from Pension Plans RIF’s from $ 1,000.00 to $ 10,000.00

C. GOVERNMENT REFORMS – The Country needs to move away from long standing tenures of politicians which is seen to be denigrating to progress, perceived too often resulting in arrogance, self-indulgence, autocratic power and a failure to welcome needed leaders with energy, innovative ideas and enthusiasm, indeed, moribund government seems more commonplace where leaders have outlived uselessness to Country and cling to power out of a false impression that they are ‘owed’ respect and ‘deserve’ to remain in power due to longevity, which is folly and needs to be replaced with “I will do my best and after I have exercised by usefulness I will display the needed grace to exit”.  So, we advocate a few fundamental changes are needed, as follows:

1. Set dates for elections each four (4) years

2. Proportional representation

3. Effective “Recall Legislation” that will permit the electorate to recall leaders whom they feel either mislead, deceived or plain lied via promises to get elected and did not seek to fulfill promises after becoming elected and/or whom after six (6) month intervals has demonstrated an ineptness, thus need to be recalled, with public opportunity to fulfill recall demands improved drastically over existing recall legislation, as, frankly, it is to be government for the people, all the people, and the democratic right without being forced to wait til the next election to rid representation of undesired politicians.

4. To prohibit “Patronage Appointments” rather, promotion or appointment is to be made upon the merits and qualification of candidates, not merely party affiliation.

5. There needs to be “Open and free votes” that permit each elected MLA or MP to vote their conscience and as expected by constituents, not along party lines or as demanded by a party Leader.

6. No elected politician should serve more than two (2) or maybe three (3) terms of office, to be decided but no more empire dynasty building and successive terms beyond this duration, which too often results in complacency and moribund bodies.

7. The Canadian dollar needs to be protected and thus we arbitrarily set an artificial amount to be used as a benchmark, at .75 cents, that dropping below is in our opinion contributing to not only weakening the dollar but similarly lowering productivity, contributing to the apparent “brain drain”.  It is our sense we need to become competitive and develop a healthy economy but to do so a fundamental change of attitude and approach, in part, recognizing creation of competitive business with strong leadership is crucial, to the process.

8. It is our sense a competitive compensation package is important but we dispel the myth that unto itself is folly, namely, “we must pay more, sometimes seen as exorbitant compensation, to attract and retain competent people”, sometimes used to support increasing “politician” compensation, which in fact, most elected leaders at Federal & Provincial level particularly, earn in excess of what they had previously earned in the private sector, thus, we have not attracted a competent group, with certain notable exceptions, we just pay more for mediocrity; it is the same argument, at Municipal level, wherein we hear the same argument to justify sudden compensation increases, after being elected, but even with rising amounts over the years, we still do not attract a high caliber of competent Municipal politician – simply, competence exists throughout the spectrum of communities and the Country, and we find excellence and effective leaders from volunteers to senior government, with no relevance to income or for the most part, education, as well, politicians are elected by their numbers of supporters, regardless of competence, so, it is our sense that while having a competitive compensation, for the position, there is in fact, no relevance to the candidate elected.

9. To change the current Senate from a patronage and appointment basis, by the Prime Minister to a body that will function in a more impartial and effective manner for all Canadians, as an ELECTED “TRIPLE E” Senate.

10.  Severance payment to terminated people, for cause and/or unjust cause, should reflect tenure in the position and thus afford individuals compensation that will permit opportunity for them to readjust their lives and seek new employment.  From a Private Sector background and in consideration of normal Court Awards, most if not all existing agreements pertaining to severance should be canceled, due to their excessive amounts, replaced by fair and reasonable competitive compensation, as follows:

a). Persons having worked a minimum six (6) months, shall qualify for severance payment in the amount of:

• under age 55 years, one (1) months salary for each year of service or part thereof;

• over age 55 years, one and one-half (1 ½) months salary for each year of service or part thereof;

b). No severance shall be paid to any person whom has worked less than six (6) months or has resigned.

D. HEALTH CARE  – “real or manufactured crisis”?  It is perceived the Public at-large across the Country are being held ransom to surreptitious efforts and concocted media spins to erode the Canada Health Act.  First, the Act is a cultural heritage of Canadians and frankly, needs to be protected and enshrined in perpetual legislation for generations to come.  As well, unwise actions by the Federal Government to arbitrarily “claw back” Provincial “transfer payments” designated for health Care are the catalyst to erosion of funding’s and cause of subsequent Provincial dilemma.  We are essentially functioning within a “self-fulfilling prophecy” that simply starts with a reduction in funds, then the “spin” claiming our “Health Care is in trouble”, which is then taken to the people by leaderless politicians and claims the Province “is broke” or the “health care system is broken”, which in fact is “by design” and certainly not as demanded by unsuspecting Canadians.  There is also a perceived conflict brewing insofar as some “politicians” advocating increased “private health care” may have “family” or “friend” interests, which time will tell but for certain, such frivolous efforts to add to the erosion of needed public health care that Canadians willingly encourage tax dollars to fund, just as with the Canada Pension Plan and Old Age Security applications, are being deceived by “politicians” following their own “agendas” without due care or concern for needs of Canadians, instead placing misguided ‘budget controls’ ahead of people protection and need, perpetuating frivolous, wasteful spending on a host of items defined by the Auditor General as same plus numerous media accounts depicting excesses & bad judgement, spending monies that should  be properly designated toward important Health Care, Education, etc., due to no accountability/demands  placed upon “politicians” to do so.

E.  STANDARDS FOR CANDIDATES SEEKING ELECTION – Some fundamental qualities stand out when seeking a choice of whom to vote for, including:

• Candidates over 65yrs, or 70 yrs. of age should graciously move over and permit more energetic and likely innovative leaders to emerge

• Candidates serving two (2) or a maximum three (3) terms of office should move over and permit new leaders to emerge, likely those with more drive and enthusiasm to “make things happen”, not having settled in to a “job” earning income and many into complacency.

• Patronizing Politicians whom fear to challenge incumbents, possibly fearing their own personal likelihood of losing, essentially exacerbate the current situation that may exist and perpetuate “undue length of tenure in a position” and foster the “power” versus commitment to “serve” perceptions.

• Long serving Politicians tend to look upon incumbents as one’s who turn the respective electoral district into a “personal fiefdom”, or as “a Job” and source of income, improving retirement plans and personal gains, and often moving into complacency, thus we encourage shorter tenures of office, per position.  The U.S. system of two (2) terms for President are closer to what politicians in Canada should follow and which we propose.

• Abandon “slates” in Municipal elections albeit often denied by “candidates’ that they are affiliated with “Provincial parties”, but “true independent candidates” should be the norm Municipally.  This will evoke more of a “community dedication” to one’s community than to foster provincial party goals and/or ‘training ground’ for Provincial politicians along party line.

• Abandon likelihood of creating a moribund government by too long service, too old incumbents, and having served longevity imply “we owe politicians something” whereas, in most cases we have afforded being elected well

• Encourage candidates at each level of government to come forward, remunerate them well for their service, demand excellence, ethics, integrity, enthusiasm, responsiveness and pro-active leadership, do not accept mediocre performance.

NOTE: The Council Advocacy “For a Better North America” recognize the perceived futility in making these many recommendations due to such an entrenched and self-serving political movement in existence, that places more importance upon party power and self-indulgence than any perceived caring about the Country and certainly not toward all the people, beyond possible party constituents, for the most part.  We are cautiously optimistic people want political reforms and more accountable government, no more promises and lies, no more deceit, no more arrogance and willful spending of our tax dollars on too many frivolous things or party hack favors and patronage, we simply expect more responsible and accountable, diligent people to lead us and to restore “Honorable” to the profession of politician.

Viewers are invited to email The Council Advocacy at thecounciladvocacy@shaw.ca for a copy of any specific document and/or if in doubt your Federal or Provincial Government has received such document, The Council Advocacy will be pleased to forward a copy of any specified document to the person designated, upon receipt of the name and e.mail address of a designated ‘government’ recipient.  Viewers may then send their letter of “support pertaining to The Council Advocacy” web.site statements and/or selected subject document(s), to the member of any level of government they have selected, which may include any references contained within this web.site.

F. RETURNING CANADA TO CANADIANS – SOME THOUGHTS!

Whenever Canadians seek answers to some perceived silly notions or programs implemented without consultation and often without reasoning, often very costly, often serving no true value to Canada, they are dismissed by “all knowing politicians” and whenever another race is mentioned the oft “racist” or “bigot” moniker is brought out of the closet to dissuade further informed debate and so it goes.  To put forth commonly held beliefs of Canadians, we herewith ask some pertinent questions that beg answers:

a). Why not get rid of “Multiculturalism” as we know it today as it has unwittingly taken on a life of its own and has become a “divisive” and costly” vehicle that pales in comparison to original ideas and needs?

b). Why not get rid of “French” as an “Official Second Language” except in Quebec, a “distinct society” or wherever a Provincial Government may decide to accept as “Primary” or “Second” Language?  Abandon the silliness of imposing at other Provinces and thus incurring very costly and unnecessary steps!

c). Why not get rid of “metric”, except possibly on a product being “exported” to a Country using metric.  Our major trading partner the U.S. does not use metric, so why should Canada follow this unnecessary and costly path?

d). Why not make the understanding, speaking and writing of English mandatory to all whom would immigrate to Canada and thus negate considerable costs to undertake education aspects in schools for “English as a second language Students”?

e). Why not be proud of “Canada”, recognize Canada is a Country, a place of diverse peoples, those whom place Canada first, whom speak English first, whom may speak openly and free, whom may practice their religion freely but accept Canada’s values, culture, practices & laws first, thus, abandoning any aspect of “former cultures or beliefs, politically or otherwise” that may be seen as offensive or derogatory to our way of life and democracy?