Well, it looks like the teenage rebellion on facebook is working, McGuinty is now indicating that he may change his mind on the proposed ban. I’ve blogged about this here and here in the past. 

Class, what are the lessons to be learned so far?

• Spreading the word on facebook on mass
• Calling & e-mailing your politicians
• Consistent media outreach/coverage

That’s a formula for success. Your homework is to keep it up because its not over yet. 

Student Unions and the Canadian Federation of Students should take note. The 150,000+ youth in those facebook groups will eventually wonder why their tuition fees are so high compare to other provinces and why it keeps on going up.

I hope American judges will decide this matter in the same spirit that the Canadian supreme court has ruled in the past. Separate is not equal. Frankly, this should have never even gone to a referendum. Rights of a minority should always be protected from the reign of a majority. There was something terribly immoral about the whole referendum, worsened only by its verdict.

Check out this comment on the issue by MSNBC’s Keith Olbermann, sent to me by Teji B:

Conservatives are looking to cut party subsidies, I can only imagine how the debate in parliament will go down when this comes up. 

I say, if Conservatives really want to save taxpayers dollars, they should end the lawsuit they have against Elections Canada for the 1.1 million they overspent in the 2006 election.

The argument for and against is argued well by two senior professors and co-bloggers on the Becker-Posner Blog. Becker (economist and professor) argues against providing a bailout and Posner (judge and senior lecturer in law) argues for it, at least for now.  

I tend to agree with Posner and those who argue that during a recession and great economic volatility, the big three automakers should not be allowed to fall. The ripple effect of a bankruptcy and restructuring can be overcome but only during stable economic times, not now. United States isn’t even over the problems of the sub-prime mortgage crisis and the credit crunch that followed. If this industry falls, the economic doomsday scenarios have already been well publicized, reaching over 2.5 million people in its initial stages. Not to mention the unimaginable struggles this would cause to working families. No, that cannot be permitted to happen.

The government needs to buy the big three enough time to ride out this recession. How they do it, is still open for debate. Certainly, it should be some form of a loan with a plan for how the government will get back the tax payers money. The opportunity is certainly there for attaching conditions to expedite Obama’s agenda for reducing fossil fuel consumption.

Its painful to watch:

Thanks to Teji B (as he is known on facebook) for sending me a link to that video. 

I’ve watched the human rights debate on Michael Coren Show, posted by My Blahg. It featured Noa Mendelsohn Aviv from Canadian Civil Liberties Association, Mike Brock, Bernie Farber from Canadian Jewish Congress and Warren Kinsella.

I was surprised to see how weak the argument against Human Rights Commissions really was. No matter how eloquent and intelligent the speaker may be, its impossible to turn this grey issue into black & white without breaking laws of physics. Looking at this from a non-partisan perspective, it seems to me that both camps are a lot closer to agreement then they let on. Here is the basic summary of what I didn’t see any major disagreement on:

- There must be limits on expression.

- Human Right Commissions serve an important purpose in protecting human rights.

- Changes need to be made to improve the process. These include, introducing natural justice with respect to legal costs and speeding up dismissal of frivolous complaints. 

Call me a naive pragmatist but this doesn’t have to be a polarizing issue.

There is something buzzing on Facebook in Ontario. In a matter of days, high school students, young adults and university students flocked to protest proposed changes on Facebook groups (you can read more details here), these two seem to be the most popular: 

Young Drivers Against New Ontario Laws - 53,559 members and counting

Stop McGuinty’s new plan for Teenage Drivers! - 13,339 members and counting

In the media, the debate is starting to resemble the one I had with my mother when I was younger. I wanted to go out with my friends on a particular night. The answer was that I couldn’t and then my mother would typically say: “I know you don’t like it now but once you get older, you’ll understand.” If thats how the debate is framed, it will end the same way it did for me. I had stay home. Sorry kids but thats life.  

The real question that should be asked is, how do we effectively improve public safety in a reasonable way? Stopping adults who work for a living or who are in their 1st/2nd year in University from carpooling doesn’t make a lot of sense to me. 

If we just stick to sober facts, 25-34 year olds have the highest statistics for: percentage of drinking drivers in fatal crashes, as taken from Transport Canada study. Thats about 25%. Those between 16-19 represent about 11% for comparison. 

If you want to correct for distortion based on % of licensed drivers and look at it from a motor vehicle deaths per capita perspective, 20-24 year olds are still at greater danger then 15-19 year olds. 

Statistics are nice but for me, this debate really comes back to responsibility. As VP UTM at the University of Toronto Students’ Union, I always supported programs that promoted the practice of designated drivers and carpooling in general. I believe this bill will undo some of those efforts as active drivers with a G2 license will not be able to legally have more then one friend in the car. 

There is a better way. Mothers Against Drunk Driving has been doing an excellent job with their high school outreach programs. A good friend of mine is currently traveling through out Canada and talking with kids about the dangers of drunk driving. Government can’t take away a drunk friend’s keys before he/she gets behind a wheel, but friends can. Creating that culture of safety is something people can keep throughout their lives because the dangers of drunk driving don’t end on their 22nd birthday. Its what has been decreasing alcohol-related fatalities for young drivers already: 

My advice to the thousands of teens and young adults that want do oppose this legislation is this:

1. Keep in mind that the intentions behind this legislation is noble and good.

2. Stick to the facts, be respectful and never use terms like “just stupid” when talking to the media or any other serious person. 

To take action on this, start by talking with your family. I’ve already posted how you can get in touch with your MPP in the article down below. There is also an online petition that has been circulating, it can’t hurt.

Generally speaking, try to frame the question on the grounds of what’s reasonable and effective given the facts above rather then getting into the child vs parent debate.  

Whatever happens, remember the more important lesson out of this experience: Politics matters.