Doctor.  Member of Parliament.  Taxi Driver.

Hedy Fry does it all.

Well, the CBC called the other day.  They're doing an election special called "Taxi Chat" on The National.  Basically, the premise is this: they get high-profile candidates to drive around their ridings in a taxi cab. 

When Hedy heard about this show, she lept at the opportunity to drive around downtown Vancouver picking up constituents and taking them to their destinations. 

Click here to watch the video! (Opens in a new window)

Hedy was recently a guest on CPAC's Beyond Politics program.

To watch the video, click here (opens a new window to CPAC's website).

From the website:

Beyond Politics

Liberal MP Hedy Fry grew up in poverty on the island of Trinidad where her father worked as a tailor and her mother worked as a secretary. An only child, Hedy excelled at school, earning a scholarship to attend Oxford University. To her parents surprise, she turned down the scholarship and instead pursued medical studies at Trinity College in Dublin. After graduation, Dr. Hedy Fry then moved to Canada with her husband, also a doctor, and settled in Vancouver. An activist within the medical community, Fry became president of the BC Medical Association in the early 90's and among the people who took notice, was Jean Chrétien, then leader of the Opposition. Chrétien convinced Hedy to run against the sitting Prime Minister, Kim Campbell, and to her greatsurprise, she won. Hedy Fry has been the MP for Vancouver Centre ever since, and tonight she is Catherine Clark's guest on Beyond Politics.

Hedy's Op-Ed Article in the Calgary Herald 

Science says safe injection site a success
 
Dr. Hedy Fry
For The Calgary Herald
Friday, May 30, 2008

Re: "Vancouver's safe injection site contradiction in name and deed: We should focus on the problem as a moral issue," by Susan Martinuk

I would like to clarify some misconceptions expressed by Martinuk in last Friday's column regarding Vancouver's safe-injection site.

Good public policy should be based on objectively researched evidence, and not on subjective morality or ideology.

Addiction is a medical problem. Extensive medical research has established that over the last 20 years. Effective solutions must therefore be based on good public health principles.

These universally accepted public health principles are: prevention and epidemiology (research and data), harm reduction, treatment and rehabilitation. These principles work together to form a comprehensive, integrated strategy for dealing with public health problems.

Those who exploit the addicted by selling and trafficking in illicit drugs are criminals and should be targeted with effective criminal and law enforcement strategies.

Insite, Vancouver's safe injection site, is a harm reduction project. It is not an original concept. It was patterned on similar, highly successful, harm reduction programs, (sanctioned by the European Parliament) in Switzerland, Germany, Belgium, Portugal and Spain, to name a few, as well as numerous safe injection facilities in Australia.

The project in Vancouver was set up as a clinical trial, to see whether the European and Australian results could be achieved in a North American setting.

The research project was conducted by scientists at UBC and the Centre for Excellence in Clinical Trials for HIV/AIDS.

The protocols followed accepted international scientific standards for clinical research. The chief researcher is Dr. Julio Montaner, a respected clinician and current president of the esteemed Council of the International AIDS Society.

The target population, as in most harm reduction research, was the small but very high-risk IV drug user cohort in Vancouver, who had extremely high overdose mortality rates, peaking at over 200 in the mid-1990s. This group was also at highest risk for HIV and hepatitis C infection, and for frequent hospitalization. They were also the group least likely to seek treatment.

Within six months of the establishment of Insite, the overdose deaths had dropped to zero and remained so among Insite users. Within 18 months, the users of this very resistant group were seeking detox and treatment. There are now 24 beds in the building that provide immediate detox treatment facilities.

Moreover, the rates of illness and hospitalization dropped dramatically, at great savings to the health-care system (Vancouver Coastal Health Authority), and the spread of HIV and hepatitis C was contained in this high risk group.

One of the objectives of the project was also to determine whether public order would be achieved. The Vancouver Police Department's Commander of the drug unit, at the time, Kash Heed (now chief of police for West Vancouver), attests that this is so.

The Chinatown Merchants' Association was adversely affected by the public disorder and were opposed to Insite. Today, they say that within two years, crime and public disorder has decreased markedly.

As per accepted scientific research principles, the Insite research and results were analyzed by 22 international research panels from many countries. They attest to the validity of the research findings: saving lives, decreasing illness and the spread of disease and decreasing public disorder. Some of these reports are published in the May edition of the International Journal of Drug Policy.

Martinuk continues to hold that there are no facts behind Insite's success. I refer her to the body of supporting, scientific literature. If she does not trust science, then I refer her to the chief of police of the District of West Vancouver; to the affected local business community and the experience of Europe and Australia. Then I ask her to compare all of this evidence with the one report cited by the minister of Health (and commissioned by him).

Martinuk holds that this issue should be judged morally and not scientifically. As a physician whose professional ethic -- do no harm -- is based on harm reduction, my view is quite different. I believe that to deny proven life-saving assistance to those who are vulnerable, simply because we disapprove of their lifestyles, is perhaps the greatest immorality of all.

Dr. Hedy Fry is a physician and Liberal MP for Vancouver Centre

© The Calgary Herald 2008

What’s the cure for our lack of family doctors?
By Carlito Pablo

THE GEORGIA STRAIGHT - August 29, 2008

Public-health activists are organizing a forum to remind Canada that it is not living up to its commitment under the Declaration of Alma-Ata, a major international agreement on health care that will mark its 30th anniversary in September this year.

Adopted at an international conference organized by the World Health Organization and UNICEF in the city of Alma-Ata (now Almaty) in the then–Soviet republic of Kazakhstan, the declaration set the goal of providing all citizens of the world “a level of health that will permit them to lead a socially and economically productive life”.

But according to Vancouver-based health activist Yuly Chan, Statistics Canada findings released in 2008 indicate that about 1.7 million Canadians cannot find a family doctor.

“The declaration set the goal of health for all by year 2000 mainly by providing primary health care, and we all know that the first point of contact for health care is the family physician,” Chan, spokesperson of the Alliance of People’s Health, told the Georgia Straight. (The alliance will host the forum on the last weekend of September at the SFU Harbour Centre campus.)

Vancouver resident Cathy Woods is among the one out of 15 Canadians found by the StatsCan study (released in June 2008) to be having difficulties in getting accepted as a regular patient by a family doctor.

Woods, a 66-year-old former school teacher, describes as “bizarre” her experience for the past two-and-a-half years in trying to find a family physician.

“Eight of them have turned me down,” Woods told the Straight. “In each case, they say something different. All of a sudden [they claimed], ‘I’ve got more patients and I’m busier than I thought I would be.’ ”

A mother of three grown children, Woods related that she used to have a family doctor who looked after her overall health and prescribed morphine to ease the pain caused by a chronic illness. When the doctor decided to relocate to Toronto, Woods said she couldn’t get a replacement doctor from any of the physicians in the same clinic where she used to see her physician.

Woods later found a doctor to prescribe her morphine, and this practitioner referred her to three MDs who turned her down.

In August, Woods said, she went to the clinic of Dr. Peter Marr on Robson Street. “He never really looked at me,” Woods recalled. “He went on his computer; he said: ‘Is it all right if I see your medications?’ I didn’t know he was just gonna search on-line and find my medications. And so he sees morphine, he said: ‘Oh I don’t deal with that.’ I said, ‘No, you won’t have to; I have a doctor that I get that from.’ And then a little while later, he said: ‘I don’t do narcotics addictions.’ I said, ‘I don’t have an addiction.’ He said, ‘I don’t treat chronic pain.’ ”

Marr has bought a newspaper ad stating that he is accepting new patients, and these include families, children, men and women, seniors, and prenatal.

The Straight sought Marr for comment, and an e-mail from the clinic in response read: “The nature of her medical problem is not appropriate for my family practice.”

According to the 2008 StatsCan report, there are actually about 4.1 million people who don’t have a regular medical doctor, because they were either unable to find one or they hadn’t looked.

Of those 4.1 million Canadians without a regular doctor, StatsCan reported that 3.3 million people sought treatment through various ways. They did so through walk-in clinics, hospital emergency rooms, community health centres, hospital outpatient clinics, and telephone health lines.

Vancouver Centre Liberal MP Hedy Fry was a family physician for two decades before entering politics. She recalled that in 1987, she chaired a committee of the Canadian Medical Association that issued a report noting that many family physicians and specialists were 55 or older and that there was a need to replace them over the next 15 years.

“The reality of delivering health care depends on a solid core of good family physicians,” Fry told the Straight. “It’s one thing to have a walk-in clinic and they fill a gap. But if you have chronic diseases, you need somebody who is dedicated to taking care of you. A family physician is still the most cost-effective way to deliver health care in Canada.”

Fry, a former president of the B.C. Medical Association, also recalled that the Liberal government of then–prime minister Paul Martin took note of the problem and, in 2005, tried to institute a program to annually bring in 1,000 new family doctors. She said that these physicians were supposed to be internationally trained immigrant doctors.

But according to Fry, this and other programs of the Martin government were overtaken by the federal election that was won by the Conservatives. “[Conservative Prime Minister] Stephen Harper has never once mentioned this issue,” she claimed.

Encouraging new medical graduates to go into family practice is also another challenge. Fry explained that a medical graduate usually comes out of school with a $75,000 student loan. According to her, it takes about $150,000 to start a family practice.

Shamim Jetha, president of the B.C. College of Family Physicians, cited results of a 2007 survey of 20,000 doctors nationwide that suggested access to a family doctor isn’t about to become easier.

According to Jetha, 31 percent of family physicians in B.C. reported that they intend to reduce their working hours. She explained that doctors normally put in 52 hours per week and an extra 130 hours a month for on-call duty.

“Like other professions, family physicians need a balance in their professional and personal lives,” Jetha told the Straight.

Jetha likewise recognized the need to improve the process of evaluating the credentials of foreign-trained doctors, as well as producing the proper mix of family physicians and specialists from medical schools.

“No one level of government is going to solve this problem,” Jetha said. “You need a pan-Canadian solution to recruit and train doctors.”

Where's the logic in giving politicians a best-before date?
 
GARY MASON - The Globe and Mail

August 28, 2008

Americans look at politicians in their 60s and 70s and see know-how and experience. Canadians look at politicians of the same age and see old fogies who should be lawn bowling.

If John McCain becomes the next president of the United States, it will be because Americans believe his 71 years of experience on this earth is more important than the wonderful oratory of the younger, less experienced Barack Obama.

Americans value and respect age in their politicians. We don't.

If Prime Minister Stephen Harper calls an election next week, the race in Vancouver Centre will pit 67-year-old Liberal MP Hedy Fry against 41-year-old NDP academic Michael Byers.

When he was asked about facing an incumbent who has owned the riding since 1993, Mr. Byers was dismissive. "[Fry's] approaching retirement. She's 67."

And he got away with it.

Then there was Liberal MP Robert Thibault, 48, who was on the same wavelength when asked about his would-be Conservative challenger Greg Kerr, who is 60. Mr. Thibault suggested Mr. Kerr is at an age where he should be considering retirement instead of politics. "He's what ... 62, 63 years old?"

While he later apologized, Mr. Thibault's comment reflects a broader view in this country.

"I think a lot of people in Canada have this idea of us in the Senate as a bunch of drooling idiots wearing Depends," says Liberal Senator Larry Campbell, 60. "It's ridiculous. The Senate is filled with incredibly smart people with amazingly active minds, many of whom are in their 70s. The image is so far from the truth it's not funny."

For his part, Mr. Campbell believes that as we get older we do get wiser. The harsh ideology that often marks a politician's early years in office is replaced over time with a common-sense pragmatism.

When you think of the complicated politics of the United States, it is generally the senators with the most years of experience who are needed to shepherd the most important and controversial pieces of legislation into law.

The average age of a U.S. senator is 62. Sixty-one per cent of them are 60 or older. Nineteen of the 100 senators are in their 70s. The current average age of an MP in Canada is 50.6. Only 18 per cent of them are 60 or older, including 14 over 70. The oldest person in the federal cabinet is Gordon O'Connor at 69. Next oldest is Loyola Hearn at 65.

The pages of history are filled with the names of politicians for whom age was not only not a factor but likely an asset.

Like him or hate him, Ronald Reagan is regarded as one of the most effective and important American presidents in recent history. He was just days away from turning 69 when he began his eight-year run in the White House. Many forget that Winston Churchill was 65 when he became prime minister of Britain. He retired from politics when he was 80.

And while he's not a politician, the most influential businessman in the world, Warren Buffett, is 77 and showing no signs of slowing up.

It's no secret people are looking after themselves far better today than they once did. If 40 is the new 30, then 70 is the new 60 and, in many cases now, 80 is the new 70. My in-laws are in their late 80s and I often think they both could make a valuable and intelligent contribution around Stephen Harper's cabinet table. Seriously.

"Age truly is a state of mind," Ms. Fry told me the other day. "As we get older, we have so much more to offer intellectually. I really believe that. And I think one of the most important things you learn as you get older is you don't have all the answers the way you thought you did when you were younger.

"I think the older you get, the more collaborative you become. I think you're better able to see all sides of an issue. You look to build consensus. It just comes more naturally."

Of course, not all 75-year-olds are created equal. Then again, not all 40- and 50-year-olds are either. Many 75-year-olds can handle the intellectual and physical rigours of politics and many can't. But a number on a birthday card shouldn't preclude anyone from running for politics.

Michael Byers is already learning what it's going to take to keep up with Ms. Fry. At the annual Gay Pride parade held this summer in the heart of the Vancouver Centre riding, Mr. Byers was seen waving from the back of an open-air car that carried his name on the side.

And Ms. Fry?

She danced the entire route in six-inch heels.

___________________________________________________________  

You can help Hedy win the next election.  Click here to make a secure, tax-deductible donation.

THE WINNPEG SUN

PM not ready to give up on athletes
August 15, 2008 -- By PETER ZIMONJIC, NATIONAL BUREAU

While Prime Minister Stephen Harper might be willing to wait and see if Canada brings home medals before passing judgment on our sporting reputation, the opposition wants action to improve our medal prospects now.

Canada has yet to bring home any medals from Beijing. Opposition MPs say that while our athletes are setting Canadian records and giving us much to be proud of, the time has come to invest seriously in sports.

"When we talk about a Pan Am games or a Commonwealth games, there is always talk about how much the federal government would do 'if ' we get them," Wayne marston, NDP sport critic, said. "We can't be waiting to get games.

"We have to have a program of reinvestment now that brings up the facilities across the country."

Marston points out a claim by the Federation of Canadian municipalities that Canada is $14 billion short when it comes to sporting infrastructure and says we need to do more.

"Our athletes have the heart they just need the support to go with it," marston said. "if we are going to be disappointed we should be disappointed, in our government."

Harper told reporters in Newfoundland and Labrador yesterday they should wait to see how our athletes do as the events progress before lamenting our lack of medals.

"I gather we have more medal hopes coming up in the back half of the games," Harper said. "We'll remain optimistic and obviously cheer for everyone who wears the maple Leaf."

But critics say cheering and hoping is not enough. Competing at the international level requires money for trainers, facilities and financial assistance to athletes if we expect them to bring home the bling.

"Either we are going to decide that we don't want to go to the Olympics, that we are going to be non-competitive, that we are going to sit here and watch other countries compete or we are going to join in," Hedy Fry, Liberal sport critic, said. "But if we go, we should know our reputation hangs in the balance and we have to do better."

Fry said achieving excellence at the Olympics contributes to Canada's reputation as a country of outdoorsy/sporty people and encourages those of all ages to participate in sports.

"It's not that we aren't good enough ... it's that we don't have the same opportunities other countries have placed in front of their athletes to help them to be competitive." 
 

For Immediate Release
August 6, 2008

Conservatives' contradiction of WHO harm prevention shows disregard for Canadians' health

OTTAWA - The Conservative government's refusal to support critical harm reduction strategies shows its callous disregard for the health of Canadians and is contrary to volumes of scientific evidence, Liberal MPs said today.

"The World Health Organisation (WHO) supports safe injection sites. The Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS (UNAIDS) supports safe injection sites. Scientific study after scientific study supports safe injection sites. Provincial governments and local communities support safe injection sites. Yet this Conservative government opposes it," said Liberal Health Critic Robert Thibault.

Yesterday the Conservatives again refused to accept the clear science of harm reduction while at a WHO event that promoted safe injection sites as a "priority intervention" in the global battle to stop the HIV/AIDS crisis. The WHO included safe injection sites as part of a "how-to" manual for fighting the global HIV/AIDS epidemic.

"Since coming to power, the Conservative government has consistently ignored and denied the clear evidence about how effective safe injection sites are at reducing harm.  Is the government now saying that the rest of the world should ignore the evidence too?" said Mr. Thibault.

"The Harper government is once again choosing ideology instead of science," said Liberal Public Health Critic Dr. Carolyn Bennett. "The WHO and public health practitioners have the science proving that harm reduction saves lives. Health Minister Tony Clement is embarrassing Canada on the world stage by his ideologically driven position. He opposes supervised injection sites yet says he supports needle exchange which makes no medical sense."

"After the SARS crisis, the Liberal government created the role of the Chief Public Health Officer of Canada so 'Canada's Doctor' could speak directly to Canadians without political interference," she said.  "The Minister should take the doctors' advice and stop playing with peoples' lives."

Liberal MP Dr. Hedy Fry, who is an ardent supporter of Vancouver's InSite program, said safe injection sites can be the beginning of a pathway out of addiction.

"They help keep addicts from overdosing, contracting HIV/AIDS, and encourage users to get off drugs. Which parts of that does Mr. Harper oppose?" she said.

She added that the Conservative government's position is counterproductive to protecting the health of Canadians.

"Harm reduction programs like InSite don't just help addicts - they also help countless numbers of Canadians who are affected by loved ones suffering under the grip of substance abuse," she said.

-30-

Contact:

Office of Dr. Hedy Fry
613-992-3213
604-666-0135

Fry urges Green Shift in town hall

THE CALGARY SUN
2008-08-06 03:03:48 MST
By SHAWN LOGAN

Still stinging from Alberta's rebuke of the federal Liberal's Green Shift strategy, one of the party's top guns made the pitch to a tough crowd last night.

Liberal MP Hedy Fry, in Calgary for a round table talks on proposed changes to Canada's copyright act, continued the opposition's campaign to drum up support for the plan, that has drawn fire from Alberta's energy sector, at a meeting at the Hillhurst Sunnyside Community Hall.

Despite comparisons to the hated National Energy Program from the 1970s, Fry said Albertans haven't been given the full picture of the plan and she's hoping to win some converts in the energy-rich province.

"It's been made into a bogeyman even before it came out," she said. "We're making the effort to explain it because a lot of people don't understand that it's going to shift money back into their pockets."

Fry said the plan encourages heavy carbon emitters, primarily those in Alberta's oilsands, to create technologies to curb their impact on atmosphere with financial incentives.  

"Those who continue to emit will be smacked and those who work on lowering them will be rewarded," she said.

© 2008, Canoe, Inc.

From Ski Hills to Parliament Hill: June is Brain Injury Awareness Month in Canada

GATINEAU, QC, Jun 2, 2008 -- The Brain Injury Association of Canada and its national partners are gearing up for Brain Injury Awareness Month in Canada, June 2008. From the movie house to the House of Commons, events aiming to inform and protect Canadians against this costly, yet preventable injury will occur throughout the month.

"Some sport helmets sold in Canada offer no more protection than putting a bag of milk over your head." - Ski Canada Magazine (December 2002)

Locally and nationally, Brain Injury Awareness Month brings to light the ongoing struggle organizations such as the Brain Injury Association of Canada have chosen to undertake to reduce the number of preventable injuries in Canada, including brain injuries. Treating preventable injuries costs Canadians $14.7 billion per year. This price is putting Canadian business at an economic disadvantage, lowering the standard of living for all Canadians, and putting our publicly funded health care system at risk.

In June, the BIAC will ask Canadians to do their part to protect themselves, and their children. Many communities and legislators are already doing their part. Olympic host municipality, West Vancouver, has taken a resolution to the Federation of Canadian Municipalities urging them to develop a national injury prevention strategy. The Canadian Standards Association will publish, in June, the world's best standard for ski and snow-board helmets; however, helmet manufacturers have refused to apply these standards unless legislated to by the federal government.

Dr. Hedy Fry, MP for Vancouver Centre, has written to Prime Minister Harper, asking for an Order in Council to have her private members bill (C-412) passed. Bill C-412, if enacted would amend the Hazardous Products Act, and prohibit the advertising, sale, or import into Canada of recreational snow sport helmets that do not meet the requirements of applicable Canadian Standards Association specifications.

"There is no legislation requiring other sport helmets to be CSA approved. This places many children and youth at risk of serious brain injuries or death." - George Abbott, Health Minister, British Columbia

To support Dr. Fry's efforts, Canadians are asked to visit www.mostisnotenough.ca so they can tell our prime minister and health minister that we need Bill C-412. Until such a law is passed, our government is turning its back on the leading killer and disabler of children and young adults in Canada. As a result, Canada will remain near the bottom of a list of countries whose governments invest in youth injury prevention programmes.

- FOX NEWS June 3, 2008

Dr. Hedy Fry: Protecting the Safety of Canadians... Where is the Minister of Health?

INJECTION OBJECTION - Vancouver Courier

May 7, 2008

Two Vancouver MPs were quick to issue statements last Friday over the battle with the federal Conservative government to keep the city's supervised injection site open.

Vancouver-Centre Liberal MP Hedy Fry said the government's "Republican-style ideological war against drugs" continues to trump mounting scientific evidence supporting harm reduction measures such as Insite.

"It is simply irresponsible to ignore scientifically based proof of the efficacy of harm reduction programs like this and base public policy on ideology alone because real people suffer the consequences," Fry's statement said.

A series of articles published May 2 in the International Journal of Drug Policy criticized the Conservative government for its lack of support for Insite.

Vancouver East NDP MP Libby Davies says medical researchers from the University of B.C. revealed that the government suppressed evidence and denied funding to scientists who are "looking objectively at the merits of Insite."

Davies noted more than 20 medical and academic studies were published showing health and social benefits of Insite at 139 East Hastings.

"[Stephen] Harper doesn't understand that you can't just hide the facts whenever they don't suit your political agenda," she says. "We need a change in direction. It's time for this government to make decisions based on evidence instead of ideology."

SFU criminologist Dr. Neil Boyd addressed the Ottawa press gallery Monday to talk about his research and the benefits of Insite.

Insite's operating agreement with the federal government expires at the end of June. The facility opened in September 2003. It's the only legal injection site in North America.

It's open every day and people as young as 16 can use it. No one has died at the site, according to the facility's staff which is composed of members from Vancouver Coastal Health and the PHS Community Services Society.

© Vancouver Courier 2008

Embracing Hedy the person, not Hedy the quote
By Dale Bass - Kamloops This Week - March 07, 2008

Hedy Fry is one intelligent, articulate, determined woman.

And yes, that fact surprised me, too.

But perhaps it was unfair to judge the Liberal MP from Vancouver Centre solely by her inane remarks made almost seven years ago, when, on March 21, 2001, she gave her “burning crosses in Prince George" speech.

The woman who met with KTW during a recent trip to Kamloops is so much more than that regrettable moment.

And, to be fair, is there a politician in the country who has never said anything ridiculous and then wanted to erase the moment from history?

During a conversation that was obviously going longer than her executive assistant wanted — he pointedly stood by the door for quite some time while Fry continued talking — the one-time wannabe Liberal leader let loose on the health-care system in Canada.

It came about as the result of one simple question: Whatever happened to doctors who would see a sick patient the same day the patient called?

Instead, with many doctors, one almost has to plan the sickness to book an appointment that likely won’t be scheduled for days.

If you can’t wait, then go to a clinic or the hospital emergency room.

It just doesn’t seem right.

As a family physician herself, Fry agrees, noting that at least five million Canadians don’t have a doctor. Tens of thousands more are on long waitlists and every level of government is saying there’s just no more money to be put into the system.

Fry’s got her own views on how to fix the system, ideas she included in a report she prepared when the Liberals were still the governing power.

She says the report has been shelved somewhere by the Conservatives and no one will tell her what’s happening with it.

It’s likely not on Stephen Harper’s summer reading list.

Fry says the shortage of family physicians can be explained by the financial reality a graduating medical student faces.

Along with that MD comes about $150,000 worth of student debt, as well as another $150,000 to set up a practice, so many graduates specialize to make the bigger bucks to pay off that debt quicker.

The cost of a medical degree also puts it out of reach for pretty much anyone who comes from a low-income family.

Some communities are offering to pay off medical student loans if the graduating doctors will come to their towns, Fry says, but even then, there’s no guarantee anyone will stay.

She’d like to see a multi-directional solution, with a system to allow doctors from other countries to gain experience in the Canadian medical culture in clinics for a while, and then letting them start their own practices.

Don’t restrict it to doctors, however, but include other health-care practitioners, too.

Fry sees another solution in the preamble to the Health Act — medicare should pay for medically necessary services, but if you’re one of those patients who doctor-shops, or insists on a third and fourth opinion, she thinks you should pay for the extra use of the system.

The social democrat in me sees that as deplorable, but then I think of a friend who for years went from doctor to doctor to doctor, gathering up prescriptions and convincing herself she had every ailment possible.

What kind of needless cost did she create?

It’s a difficult issue to reconcile.

But not for Fry.

It makes sense — as does Hedy, when we pay attention to the whole person, rather than the one part that made one headline years ago.

Politicians again push to add women's ski jumping to Vancouver 2010 Olympics
THE CANADIAN PRESS  --  Feb 24, 2008

VANCOUVER - Supporters of women's ski jumping are making another push to have the event included in the 2010 Winter Olympics in Vancouver and Whistler.

Opposition politicians plan to table motions in Parliament and the B.C. legislature this week to push the International Olympic Committee to change its mind and add women's ski jumping to the Games that Canada is hosting.

New Democrat Harry Bains, Olympics critic in the B.C. legislature, and his federal counterparts in the Commons will put forward motions calling on both assemblies to include women's ski jumping as a competitive event in 2010.

"Hopefully we will send a very strong message to the IOC that they need to come out of their ivory towers, be with the people here and do what the people of Canada want them to do and hopefully we will be successful," Bains told a small rally Sunday in downtown Vancouver.

The federal and B.C. governments, as well as civic leaders from host city Vancouver, have all made sympathetic noises in support of women ski jumpers.

Peter Julian, NDP MP for Burnaby-New Westminster, said he and other local New Democrats signed a letter to Prime Minister Stephen Harper urging him to renew efforts to get the IOC to change its mind.

"This week in the Parliament of Canada we will be proposing the same motion that our NDP colleagues are proposing in the (B.C.) legislative assembly," he added.

Deedee Corradini of the lobby group Women's Ski Jumping USA told the rally the IOC's claim they've rejected the sport because it needs more development doesn't ring true.

Women have been ski-jumping since 1924, about the time the sport was added to the Olympics, she said.

"They started in skirts, believe it or not," said Corradini.

Moreover, the International Ski Federation has sanctioned women's ski-jumping events since 1995, with 135 women from 16 countries registered as active jumpers.

Corradini, who was mayor of Salt Lake City when it won the right to host the 2002 Winter Games, says the IOC has pencilled in newer women's sports such as ski-cross - "a brand new sport that is much less developed" - under a 1991 mandate for gender equality.

"We've been around since 1924, so we've been grandfathered," she said.

The IOC voted in 2006 voted against adding women's ski jumping to the Vancouver-Whistler Games, saying the sport has not yet developed to a high enough standard to merit inclusion.

Corradini said supporters have methodically shot down all of the IOC's reasons for not including the event in 2010, from scheduling problems to not enough competitors.

"You have heard every single excuse debunked here by Deedee," said Vancouver Centre Liberal MP Hedy Fry. "We've come down to one and one only and that is plain discrimination, and we in Canada will not stand for that."

Canada's Charter of Rights and Freedoms has clear provisions covering gender equality, Fry said.

"The money to build that ski slope came from two levels of government and if governments cannot stand up for the Charter, who will?" asked Fry.

The federal government, one of the 2010 Games' chief financiers, is backing the women, though admitting the IOC has the final say.

The B.C. government also supports the inclusion of women's ski jumping but the Vancouver Olympic Organizing Committee (VANOC) has washed its hands of the dispute, saying its role is to stage the Games and that the issue is IOC turf.

Corradini said it makes no sense for governments, who are core financiers of the Games, not to have no say in event makeup.

"Is it right to say we want all your money but we don't want to hear from you?" she said in an interview.

Corradini said VANOC can also wield some influence, noting organizers of the Salt Lake City Games succeeded in getting the IOC to include bobsleigh and skeleton in 2002.

"It's been disappointing," she said. "I would hope that even VANOC would come on stronger than they have in the past because I think they can make a big difference."

But she stopped short of suggesting Ottawa and Victoria pressure the IOC by threatening to turn off the money tap.

"It's not my country to suggest how Canada should deal with this issue," she said. "My purpose is in representing women jumpers around the world to raise the awareness of what's happened, because most people don't even know."

Veteran American ski jumper Karla Keck, in the sport for 27 years, told the rally the ability for women to jump against each other at a world-class level will help raise the competitive level of the event.

"The women are ready," she said. "They've been training for this for so long and the level of the women's ski jumping has advanced so much that they deserve to live their Olympic dream."

Olympic officials are due for another inspection visit to Vancouver this week.

Supporters placed two large billboards in Vancouver this weekend that read: Just Imagine, Let Women Ski Jump in 2010.

The signs also include a quote from the Olympic Charter: "Implementing the principle of equality of men and women."

One sign went up across from VANOC headquarters and the other on a bridge connecting Vancouver and Richmond, a route visiting Olympic officials must travel on their way to and from the airport.

Flaherty sticks with his old shoes
Not the time to throw money around, but voters say otherwise
 
News Services; The Province
Tuesday, February 26, 2008

OTTAWA -- Today's budget will be fiscally prudent because of the economic uncertainty facing Canada, but will contain some new spending and one or two surprises, Finance Minister Jim Flaherty said yesterday.

His comments came as he picked up a pair of resoled shoes, rather than the traditional new footwear that finance ministers sport in advance of a budget.

"It suits this budget. It's a budget that's prudent," he told reporters, after paying $56.49 for his refurbished black brogues. "We have to stay within our means.

"We are doing some spending but in a controlled way, given the economic circumstances," he said.

Meanwhile, a poll released yesterday indicates that a large number of people think the Tories should cut taxes to stimulate spending if the economy sours.

The Ipsos-Reid poll paints a picture of a population that is upbeat about both the country's economic prospects and Stephen Harper's ability to manage the economy.

The poll, conducted for Canwest and Global National, found that 45 per cent of those surveyed chose the prime minister as their top pick for managing the economy, compared with 26 per cent for Liberal Leader Stephane Dion.

Opposition parties expect little for B.C. in the budget.

Liberal B.C. caucus chair Hedy Fry said the government is doing little for B.C. communities hit by the mountain pine beetle.

"When June comes, all that dead timber is going to go up [in] flames if they don't do something," said Fry.

Help for the forest industry is also on Fry's list, as are hospital wait-lists, roads, sewers and social housing.

Nanaimo MP Jean Crowther, B.C.'s NDP caucus chair, has few expectations that Ottawa will do anything to counter the pine-beetle fire risk or help the forest industry.

"There are some pretty serious fire hazards for many of the smaller communities, particularly First Nations, [that are] surrounded by this dead wood," she said.

Crowther also said the Tories were not doing enough to help protect B.C.'s fisheries.

Seth Klein of the left-leaning Canadian

Centre for Policy Alternatives wants more help for working families.

"Low-wage work remains at a high level in B.C.," said Klein. "People have difficulty making ends meet."

-- News Services, with a file

from Staff Reporter John Bermingham

© The Vancouver Province 2008
 

THE GEORGIA STRAIGHT

Liberals won't topple Harper
By Carlito Pablo
Publish Date: February 28, 2008

Federal Liberals are passing up another chance to pull the plug on Stephen Harper’s Conservative government. Liberal leader Stéphane Dion has indicated that the party will vote for the new budget unveiled by Finance Minister Jim Flaherty on February 26.

So far, the Grits have been stared down by the Tories. Liberals abstained from the vote on the throne speech last fall. On February 12, they walked out of the House of Commons when the Conservatives tabled a confidence motion on a crime bill. The Liberals are likely to support an extension of Canada’s military mission in Afghanistan, which the Conservatives want to be a confidence vote.

“We will not call an election just because it’s a game that people play: you know, ‘Let’s play chicken and see who would call and won’t call,’ ” Vancouver Centre Liberal MP Hedy Fry told the Georgia Straight by phone on February 20. “We haven’t lost credibility.”

That was six days before the budget came down, while the five-term MP and her staff were driving to Kelowna. Fry, who heads the Liberal caucus in British Columbia, related that they’d just been to Kamloops and Vernon. Penticton was going to be their last stop for the day.

Fry said that her foray through the Tory heartland in B.C.’s Interior was all about “really finding out the issues that are nonurban” and “not necessarily” related to any prospect of a spring election.

She didn’t agree with a suggestion that the Liberals are weak and in disarray, and can ill afford a campaign. According to Fry, the party just won’t play what she described as “mind games” in which the Conservatives want to engage.

“We think it’s manipulation,” Fry said. “It seems to be the way Mr. Harper runs his government. I think that they’re setting traps because they want to show that we’re weak. But if we fall into the trap, then we are. If you do not allow yourself to be manipulated, that is a strength in itself.”

How long will the Liberals continue to prop up the government? Eventually, this could come with a price, says UBC political scientist Allan Tupper.

“There is this point that many people have noticed or have observed that one of the things that Mr. Dion will have to confront sooner or later is his claims that the government proceeds in an intolerable way and so on, but [the Liberal party] ends either voting for its measures or abstaining,” Tupper told the Straight. “You can only play that game so far before you begin to look very weak. Many people have observed that they [Liberals] speak more loudly than their actions. When they have a chance to defeat the government, they back down.”

Tupper, who heads UBC’s political-science department, didn’t go so far as to suggest that the Liberals’ hesitancy to bring down the government has seriously eroded support from their political base.

“What it would really take to trigger it is either an accident, which can always happen…or that one of the major parties in a minority Parliament begins to become more popular and sees its advantage and moves on with it,” Tupper explained.

Results of a February 2008 survey by the Ontario-based Strategic Counsel for the Globe and Mail and CTV indicate that the Conservatives enjoy a 12-percent lead over the Liberals, their biggest lead since the 2006 election.

In its report, the Strategic Counsel noted that the Conservatives are “flirting with majority territory”. It also pointed out that triggering an election would be “highly risky” for Liberals, even referring to such action as a “big roll of the dice”.

Already more than two years old, the Harper government has made a “remarkable achievement” in lasting this long, according to Conservative Delta–Richmond East MP John Cummins.

“Most minority governments would have fallen by now,” Cummins told the Straight. “Harper has demonstrated real leadership in managing Parliament.”

Cummins only has disdain for the Liberals who haven’t called—as of yet—the Conservatives’ dare to slug it out on the hustings.

“They’re trying to justify their inability to make a decision,” Cummins said. “They’re trying to make themselves appear as someone above the fray and give the appearance that they’re more interested in sort of providing a stable government at this point, but the reality is the reason that they’re not acting is that they’re in complete disarray.”

However, the Liberals are far from being pushovers, Cummins acknowledged, pointing out that, traditionally, the Grits have 30 percent of the vote and that their voters are sticking with them. Liberals aren’t itching for a fight, but as far as the Conservatives are concerned, Cummins said: “We’re ready to go at the drop of a hat.”

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Source URL:
http://www.straight.com/article-133948/liberals-wont-topple-harper

Cameras could help police identify killers; Politicians call for more electronic eyes to combat gang violence in downtown core

Police are scouring images from as many as 30 surveillance cameras in the hope they will reveal the two gunmen who killed two men outside the Gotham steakhouse in downtown Vancouver.

"Investigators are pouring over surveillance cameras from outside the restaurant and from many other cameras in the nearby downtown area," police spokesman Const. Tim Fanning said yesterday.

Ricardo Francis Scarpino, 37, and an unidentified man were shot to death in front of the restaurant Saturday night.

Police have not released a description of the two suspects, because of different descriptions given by the large number of witnesses, said Fanning.

One man inside the restaurant dropped a handgun as police detained patrons.

Lawrence Brinley Wilson, 47, of Vancouver, appeared in court yesterday, charged with possession of a restricted firearm, carrying a concealed weapon, unauthorized possession of a firearm and possession of a controlled substance.
Meanwhile, a renewed call to install more closed-circuit cameras was sounded by area politicians.

"There is definitely a place for them and that will be discussed in the future," said Mayor Sam Sullivan, adding that he felt they did not prevent crime.

"They are very effective at helping to prove crimes, and to follow up on providing evidence on crimes," he said.

Vancouver Centre MP Hedy Fry says surveillance cameras in downtown public spaces should be part of a multi-pronged effort against violent crime.

"It couldn't hurt to have [cameras]," Fry said yesterday. "I just am always very leery of that silver-bullet thing -- the one thing we can do that will stop the problem."

Fry argues for more police in the urban core, better lighting and a co-operative process between police, citizens, government officials and business people to tackle the problem of violence.

At a national level, government needs to take a hard line with U.S. officials about the guns that are coming across the border, Fry said.

And Canada needs to look at its immigration policies, she added.

"Do we have people coming in illegally, who are running drugs?"

Vancouver-Burrard MLA Lorne Mayencourt says cameras represent "another tool" in the battle against violence downtown.

"Those individuals who are packing pistols and shooting people, or threatening to shoot people -- we need to do everything we can to catch them," Mayencourt said.

"We need to . . . get them off the street."

But Micheal Vonn, policy director for the B.C. Civil Liberties Association, says the cameras don't work.

"Video surveillance does not stop crime," Vonn said.

"We know this from the U.K., which is the most surveilled country in the world. Their billions of dollars in investment in video surveillance has not impacted their crime rate one iota, nor has it helped them solve more crimes."

Vancouver Board of Trade chief economist Bernie Magnan points out that surveillance cameras were instrumental in identifying the perpetrators of London's 2005 subway bombings.

Such devices intrude on privacy and must be used only for criminal investigations, Magnan says.

B.C. Solicitor-General John Les insists the police are doing a good job, even though no arrests have been made in the recent shooting or any of the 19 gang-related slayings late last year.

"Organized criminals know that police are out there looking at them," said Les, citing the fact no one was killed in December as evidence of the effectiveness of the new police anti-gang unit.

Quebec gets fête money, B.C. doesn't; Quebec City marks 400 years with $110 million in Ottawa's cash, our 150th nets nothing -- so far

OTTAWA -- Quebec City, 110 million; British Columbia, zero.
That's the score so far in the federal funding game for two parts of the country celebrating historic milestones this year.

The Quebec capital, marking the 400th anniversary of its founding by Samuel de Champlain, has already been granted $40 million from the Department of Canadian Heritage to pay for birthday festivities, with an additional $70 million in federal money for infrastructure upgrades, including restoration of historical sites.

Meanwhile British Columbia, commemorating the 150th anniversary of its establishment as a British Crown colony, has yet to be promised a penny from the feds.

Charles Parkinson, executive director of the BC150 Secretariat, which is organizing the celebration, said he requested funding from Ottawa last winter, but the request stagnated.

"We went there, but we didn't really hear anything," he said.
However, after persistently arguing his case to the federal government, Parkinson said he now believes some money will be forthcoming.

"Five or six weeks ago we received a call from Ottawa saying: 'We're really interested and we want to talk seriously,'" Parkinson said.

"The signs coming from Ottawa have been very, very positive. It's been slow, but they've been positive."

Officials from Heritage Minister Josee Verner's office declined an interview request.

But an e-mail from the Heritage department said funding the B.C. celebrations will be considered once a detailed request is received.

Parkinson said he intended to send the detailed request this week.

Although Parkinson declined to say how much money B.C. is asking for, Hedy Fry, the Liberal MP for the B.C. riding of Vancouver Centre, said she hopes Ottawa will contribute in the neighbourhood of $20 million.

"I am being very generous when I say, I know that the federal government will be very supportive of this, given that there is a precedent in other provinces' centennials and in Quebec's celebrations," Fry said in an interview with Canwest News Service this week.

"I think that they should do it from a point of principle."

It's undisputed that Quebec City is extremely important historically, as a hub for the fur trade and a base for the French exploration and colonization of North America. But some argue the government's hype around Quebec has gone too far, entering the realm of historical hyperbole.

Promotional material from the Department of Canadian Heritage states: "The foundation of Quebec City also marks the foundation of the Canadian state" and that "French is the founding language of Canada."

But B.C. historian Jean Barman argues Canada did not have a single founding moment. Rather, there were different founding events in different territories, which eventually became provinces and came together to form today's Canada.
The establishment of B.C. as a Crown Colony in 1858 was one of those founding moments, she argues, because the imposition of British rule stopped the territory from falling into the hands of the expansionist American republic.

"If it hadn't been for 1858, it's very possible that Canada as a country would not go coast to coast," said Barman.

So, if the 400th anniversary of Quebec's founding is worth $110 million to the Canadian taxpayer, what's the relative worth of B.C.'s 150th celebration? Or the 500th anniversary of John Cabot's landfall in Newfoundland in 1497? Or the 100th anniversary of Alberta and Saskatchewan joining Confederation in 1905?
Prominent Canadian historian Jack Granatstein said it's impossible to gauge the relative importance of different historical events -- or to compare the money allocated to different celebrations, in different places, at different times, under different governments.

"You can't. You really can't," he said. "Is an apple more important than an orange? Who knows? And it's a mug's game to try and play that."
Yet the $110 million granted to Quebec City has raised eyebrows -- and perhaps some envy -- among other historic hotspots that received less federal government largesse.

Newfoundland and Labrador received $5.5 million from the federal government for its Cabot 500 celebrations in 1997. And the small Nova Scotia community of Annapolis Royal, which was colonized in 1605 -- predating Quebec City by three years -- received just $250,000 from the federal Heritage department to celebrate its 400th anniversary in 2005.

"There was definitely great disappointment that the federal government didn't come on side much more," said Ryan Scrantor, director of the Annapolis Heritage Society. "There's a lot more votes in Quebec City than in rural Nova Scotia."

Safety standards sought for snowboarders' helmets
 
Kent Spencer
The Province
Monday, December 03, 2007

Snowboarders heading to B.C. slopes may be at risk of serious injury because some helmets offer very little protection.

"Some helmets offer no more protection than putting a bag of milk over your head," pro-helmet advocate Richard Kinar of West Vancouver said yesterday.

Kinar, who is spearheading a national effort to improve safety, said thousands of Canadians suffer head injuries every year, many in 35 km/h tobogganing mishaps.

Helmets are not required on the slopes, and alpine headgear sold in Canada has no mandatory safety standards. In contrast, safety standards for hockey helmets are enshrined in law.

Kinar, 51, is a former professional skier from an era when there were no helmets.

"I've seen a friend lose consciousness and be rushed to hospital to have holes drilled in his head to relieve the pressure," said Kinar. His son had a close call in a bicycling accident but was saved by a certified helmet.

Kinar, a board member on the Brain Injury Association of Canada, said sport-related head injuries are costly to the the health system.

"When you lose an arm or leg, you can still function, but you can't with an injured brain," he said.

The Canadian Snowboard Federation said it would welcome professional guidance in terms of safety, design and materials.

"Anybody can make a snowboarding helmet and put it on the market," said chief executive officer Tom McIllfaterick of Vancouver.

"Certainly, recreational snowboarders may be buying helmets and not know what they're getting."

Vancouver Centre MP Hedy Fry, the Liberal critic for sport, has sponsored a private member's bill placing alpine helmets in the same Hazardous Products Act that regulates hockey helmets.

"It's a simple rule change, which most people support," Fry said.

© The Vancouver Province 2007

By Dale Bass - Kamloops This Week - October 21, 2007

Stockwell Day says Mounties are reviewing their use

If a drug is healing many people, but some are dying from it, doctors would ask why, said Hedy Fry, a physician and Liberal MP for Vancouver Centre.

It’s an analogy she thinks should be applied to the use of tasers by police, especially in the wake of two taser-related deaths in Canada this past week.

Fry asked Public Safety Minister Stockwell Day during question period for reassurance the RCMP “follow clear, proper procedures for restraint and that the taser use does not continue to result in such fatalities.”

Her question came just days after two taser-related deaths, one in Montreal and one in Vancouver of a man whose mother lives in Kamloops.

Fry told KTW Day assured her the Mounties are in the midst of a review of taser use, as is the Canadian Police Association, and that he is looking forward to receiving the reports.

“We are not playing blame,” Fry said, “but we need to take a look at it.

“This is a reasonable way for reasonable people to do something when we find a situation like this.”

Speaking as a physician, Fry said “doctors are always looking for side effects [from drugs] and we look at it to find out what exact guidelines should be applied. We have to ask if it is a high risk for certain people.

“If tasers have killed people, we need to look at it to see if there is something we need to do.”

Fry suggested factors that could be revealed through a review could be as simple as the distance from which a taser is deployed to whether certain emotional states make one more prone to die from a taser.

On that point, Fry said she’d like to see clearer definitions of what a “violent behaviour” would constitute.

For Joel Johnston, it’s not that easy to quantify when violence becomes dangerous.

Johnston, the province’s use of force co-ordinator, said passive resistance is easy to identify, but there’s a fine line between RCMP protocol descriptions of active and assaultive resistance.

“When does a pull become a punch?

“When does a twist-away become a violent assault? It is a very fine line.”

Johnston likened the overriding guideline to a risk-management assessment. Officers must decide, often within seconds, if the situation can be controlled through talk, or if other measures are needed not only for their safety, but for the safety of the person involved and any bystanders.

Johnston noted the taser is used by police officers up to 4,000 times a year in Canada.

Few end with death and, usually, there are many elements that have contributed to the death, not just the taser.

People have always died in police custody, Johnston said, and there has been no increase during the past 20 years, even with the introduction of tasers.

He noted that, of more than 200 lawsuits launched against Arizona-based Taser International, none have been successful. Statistics show the company has sold taser devices to more than 11,000 law enforcement, correctional and military agencies in 44 countries, with more than 260,000 tasers sold to law enforcement alone in the past nine years.

Myriad studies have been done, both by the company and other independent bodies, that state the taser is safe and effective.

“The bottom line is we believe and all of the research indicates that conducted-energy weapons are safe and not only are they safe, they’re recommended for use in gaining control of people more quickly because it’s well known that the longer a struggle to control somebody goes on, the greater the risk to all involved becomes,” Johnson said.

“So not only are tasers safe, but they’re recommended for use in many cases so control can be established more quickly than otherwise. “

As the man responsible for establishing and maintaining standards and records of use of force for police in the province, Johnston said he wasn’t surprised to see the recent deaths lead to media interest.

He referred to two Vancouver deaths, each of which led to an inquest. The first involved a man who was smashing the toilet and sink in his rooming house, setting off the fire alarm and attacking people. He was tasered and, despite the presence of an advanced-care paramedic, died.

A case the year before involved a similar violent situation with five officers responding. One had a taser. The officers chose to physically restrain the man, wrestling with him for some time for control.

“He died at the scene in the care of paramedics, and the question asked at inquest was, guess what — why didn’t they use the taser to get him under control?” 

Harper's move slows workplace diversity
THE GEORGIA STRAIGHT (VANCOUVER)
News Features By Carlito Pablo
Publish Date: October 18, 2007

NDP MP Bill Siksay and Liberal MP Hedy Fry say the Harper government has failed to address the fact that segments of society, including women and the disabled, are being left behind in the workplace.The House of Commons had a number of unfinished issues that were relegated to the back burner when Prime Minister Stephen Harper decided last month to short-circuit the past session of Parliament.

One of these was the review of the Employment Equity Act. It seeks to ensure that the federal government, federal Crown corporations, and federally regulated firms with 100 or more workers provide equal employment opportunities to four designated groups: women, aboriginal people, persons with disabilities, and members of visible minorities. It doesn't set hiring quotas.

According to NDP MP Bill Siksay (Burnaby-Douglas), the standing committee on human-resources development and the status of persons with disabilities was going to review the act this fall. With Harper's call for a new session, which he opened with a speech from the throne on October 16, Siksay told the Georgia Straight that this look at the Employment Equity Act is expected to face delays. He also noted that if there is a new election, the review will be set back even further.

Other matters, particularly Canada's combat mission in Afghanistan, have received great attention in Ottawa circles. However, Siksay, a former citizenship and immigration critic, noted that the effort to achieve diversity in workplaces to reflect the makeup of Canadian society is also an important issue.

"I still think we haven't reached the goal," Siksay said. "There has been progress made; there's no doubt about that. It's incremental. We could be doing a better job."

Grounds cited in complaints received by the Canadian Human Rights Commission in 2006

> Disability: 41 %
> Sex: 16 %
> National or ethnic origin: 10 %
> Race: 10 %
> Age: 7 %
> Family status: 5 %
> Colour: 4 %
> Religion: 3 %
> Sexual orientation: 3 %
> Marital status: 1 %

Source: Annual Report 2006 , Canadian Human Rights Commission
The Canadian Human Rights Commission administers the Employment Equity Act and conducts regular audits of how it is being implemented. Citing the latest available data in a report last spring, the commission documented that in 2005, persons with disabilities and aboriginal people "benefited the least from employment equity initiatives" in the private sector. It noted that while the share of jobs held by Natives increased from 1.3 percent in 1997 to 1.8 percent in 2005, it was "well below" the 2.6-percent availability of aboriginal people.

Persons with disabilities held 2.7 percent of jobs in the private sector in 2005, which was slightly higher than the 2.5 percent in the previous year. "Since persons with disabilities receive less than their share of hires in all sectors, the higher representation is likely due to better self-identification among existing employees," the commission stated.

Margaret Birrell, executive director of the BC Coalition of People With Disabilities, told the Straight that she isn't surprised by how people with disabilities are faring in finding gainful employment.

"You've got to first of all overcome the attitudinal barriers of employers," Birrell said. "Then if you find an employer, you need accessible transportation. Also the [work] premises have to be accessible too."

The commission's report also stated that in the private sector, the hiring of members of visible minorities was in keeping with their availability for work.

Women, for their part, held 43.3 percent of jobs, although census data suggest that they can fill up to 47.3 percent.

The picture is slightly different in the public sector. Aboriginal people and persons with disabilities were fully represented, according to the report. Women's representation was in accordance with their availability.

However, members of visible-minority groups–which the law defines as persons other than aboriginal people, not Caucasian in race or nonwhite in colour–"still remain under-represented when compared to their availability in the work force", the report said. "The representation of visible minority members stood at 8.6%, an improvement from the previous year when they held 8.1% of all jobs, but considerably lower than the public sector availability of 10.4%," the document stated.

Liberal Vancouver Centre MP Hedy Fry told the Straight that her party will push hard for the review. The former secretary of state for multiculturalism and the status of women noted that data clearly show that some groups are being left behind in certain sectors.

"One needs to do an analysis: why is it that we haven't been able to move significantly with a particular group?" Fry asked. "Why is this group not making it? Is it because the group faces societal and other barriers? Maybe they're not getting access to education, so we can then put in the social structures and public policies that would look at the barriers those groups face that may not be employment only."

Fry also took shots at Harper's Conservative government, recalling that the former Reform Party in 1995 opposed the Liberal government's move to strengthen the equity law. "We have a party that does not agree with employment equity," she said.

Eleanor Guerrero-Campbell is a former chair of the City of Vancouver's cultural-communities advisory committee. Now the executive director of the nonprofit Multicultural Helping House Society, Guerrero-Campbell told the Straight that a review of the Employment Equity Act should also include a review of how far members of the four target groups are making inroads in management positions.

Guerrero-Campbell pointed out that it's one thing for group members to get their foot inside the door, but it's another matter whether or not they are eventually given positions of responsibility. "I know that for women, and especially women in visible minorities, their number in employment has improved but not in the serious management positions," she said. "There is a glass ceiling."

Hedy was a special guest on Liberal MP Garth Turner's "MPtv" broadcast; dicussing the CBC, and the Conservatives' plans for our public broadcaster's future.

Click here to watch (opens a new window).

FEDERAL POLITICS / An interview with Hedy Fry
Robin Perelle / Xtra.ca / Wednesday, March 28, 2007

IN WRITING: Hedy Fry says she agreed to run in 1993 because Chrétien promised to address the Charter of Rights' failure to protect gays and lesbians from discrimination. (Xtra West files)

Liberal MP Hedy Fry sat down with Xtra West Feb 16 to talk about Liberal promises, the party's new leader, the push to decriminalize consensual sex among adults, and her own long-standing connection to Vancouver Centre's queer constituents. Here is an excerpt from that interview.

XW: Tell me about Stéphane Dion. What's he like?

HF: He's a bit of an enigma, I would say. Stéphane is a very earnest man. What you see is what you get; there's no sham, there's no persona. Stéphane is very earnest, very committed. He's so earnest and committed that he's kind of nerdy, almost. He's very bright, very intellectual, loves policy, has a great deal of integrity. Stéphane has this deep sense of what is right and wrong and he will not cut corners for political reasons. So he is different from most other politicians that you know.

XW: How gay-friendly is he?

HF: He never had a problem while I was in cabinet. He just went, 'Let's get on with it. What is the problem?' He never understood why anybody would be opposed to it. He's that kind of guy: 'It's the right thing to do, let's do it. What are we arguing about here? Let's just do it.' That's the Stéphane that I know.

XW: How close are you?

HF: Oh, not very close. He is quiet, keeps to himself. Very much always with his nose in some brief he is reading. What I know of Stéphane is what I saw in cabinet when I was with him, and what I've seen since: very earnest, very dedicated, very much of a man who knows where he wants to go, what he wants to do.

XW: How much influence do you think you might have in a Stéphane Dion-led government?

HF: As much influence as I've always had. When I ran with Chrétien I ran on the whole issue of amending the Canadian Human Rights Act [to add sexual orientation to the list of prohibited forms of discrimination]. I said, 'That's what I'm running on and if you're going to do it, I'll run.' And he said, 'Okay.' And I said, 'If you give it to me in writing then I'll do it.' And he did. And every step of the way I was there as one of the key people that moved the agenda forward, all the way down to same-sex marriage.

XW: I never knew you were instrumental in amending the Canadian Human Rights Act.

HF: Didn't you know that? I dedicated my whole life to it! When Jean Chrétien came to me I had just come off being president of the BC Medical Association, I had just been their chief negotiator. I loved negotiating and I loved what I was doing. But over the years as a medical practitioner I saw that my gay and lesbian patients were actually discriminated against under the law; that their access to good health, dental and medical care was hamstrung because their relationships were not seen as having any legal status. A same-sex couple together for eight years couldn't share medical and dental benefits, couldn't share pensions when they died. Once AIDS began, and I had a lot of my gay patients die, their partners had no rights. So I realized it wasn't just that society was discriminating; the law [was discriminating].

I came here originally as a Trudeau Liberal believing very much in the Charter of Rights and Freedoms and minority rights, and I felt, hello, this is a minority that's being discriminated against. So when Chrétien came and asked me to run, I said, 'Here is an issue that the Charter is falling down on.' And he said, 'Yes, I agree, we will amend it.' And I said, 'Give it to me in writing.'

And I got a letter and I ran. And that's how I ran.

Within the first two years, when he didn't amend the Canadian Human Rights Act, Egale said, 'So when are you going to do it?' I said, 'Mr Chrétien is a man of his word and he gave me his word and I know he is going to do it in this mandate.' The next day I went to the Prime Minister. And I said, 'Prime Minister, I'm being scrummed out there on this and I gave my word and I told them that you will do it.'

He said, 'Well, yes, good idea, you talk to Herb Gray.' And the next thing is Herb Gray, who was house leader, and me and a woman named Mary Clancy who was the MP for Halifax and Sue Barnes, who was a Liberal MP from London, and Bill Graham--the four of us worked with our caucus.

Once we decided that it was going to pass and we had enough people in our caucus going to vote for it, Chrétien said, 'Well, this will be a free vote.' But we had to find out if it was going to pass. If it wasn't going to pass, it was going to be a whipped vote.

I was in cabinet at the time and I got onto Paul Martin's finance committee, which looked at the pension benefits and the health and dental benefits, and we shifted into that. And then we had the omnibus bill and immigration was changed, until finally we got to same-sex marriage. Every step of the way I was one of the key people spearheading that.

XW: So when critics say, 'What has she ever actually accomplished in concrete terms?'

HF: Listen, I'm going to tell you something. I've decided that unless you are a great self-promoter who runs around beating yourself on the chest and telling everyone what you do over and over and over, people don't know what you do. The community here supports me because they know what I do.

I used to work with the gay and lesbian community here. We used to sit down and I would have regular meetings with them. Three times a year, I would get the leaders in and I would say, 'Okay, here's how the system works, guys. We want to get this done, we've got to get the system to work us.'

XW: What happened to those meetings?

HF: Well, when we got what we wanted the meetings disbanded. Now I'm mostly talking about tranny rights. This is my next little fight that I am taking on.

XW: What are your plans to help them?

HF: Well, as always, you work quietly. You move it into the agenda within your caucus, you talk to your leader about it, and then you work with the community and say, 'Here's how we're going to achieve this together.' It's about strategizing; it's about making things happen.

XW: Is the push to change Canada's sex laws over now?

HF: I think you will find that the women's caucus [the all-party Standing Committee on Women] has been working on it. The women's caucus has a strong majority of female Liberals in there. You will see some things that will move the agenda forward.

XW: Such as?

HF: Well, I can't preempt the committee.

XW: You're on that caucus?

HF: No, I'm not. But I chaired the subcommittee [on solicitation laws]. When the subcommittee started we had four meetings planning how the committee would conduct itself and what we could do. Then there was the 2004 election and the committee fell off the table. When we came back I was Parliamentary secretary, and Parliamentary secretaries are not allowed to sit on committees, except the committee that they're Parliamentary secretary of. So I had to be sitting on Citizenship and Immigration.

Then again, [the House] brought down the government before we had the time to finish all of the things that we had set out to do.

XW: But when the subcommittee finally reported in December--

HF: No, the subcommittee fell off the table.

XW: Right, but once it was reconstituted--

HF: I had it reconstituted. I worked very hard and I pushed and pushed. I wrote to [Vancouver East NDP MP Libby Davies], and I wrote to Réal Menard, and I wrote to the other Bloc woman, and I wrote to John Maloney. And I had Derek Lee, because he was on the Justice Committee, speak to reintroducing the committee just so it could finish its report.

XW: But the report itself in the end was so weak. What happened there?

HF: Well, the weakness was coming out of the three parties that I had felt originally would have come out with strong language on it. I thought we were going to just say: 'Look, it's time to decriminalize solicitation, to look at bawdyhouse prohibitions because they leave street prostitutes at extraordinary risk.'

And [had we looked at decriminalizing] bawdyhouses then we would have been able to look at issues like bathhouses and stuff like that.

But we suddenly saw that the appetite for strong language [had vanished]--the NDP did not have the same appetite, the Bloc did not have the same appetite. I think that the membership of those two parties had changed and that there was some strong sensitivities to this.

XW: Libby blamed the

Conservatives.

HF: Libby can't blame the Conservatives. The Conservatives had two votes; four votes against two.

We got agreement on certain recommendations. But at least we thought that the three opposition parties could agree on certain things. We agreed on about two recommendations. But to put the word 'decriminalize' in became a problem.

XW: Would you have liked to see the word 'decriminalize'?

HF: I would have liked to see the word 'decriminalize' written in a context. Just to say, 'Let's decriminalize solicitation' wasn't going to solve the problem. We had to say, 'Let us look at decriminalizing solicitation and introducing a couple of other things as part of a comprehensive package.'

We also wanted to make sure that we weren't suggesting that we were condoning the exploitation of women who were poor and were pushed into prostitution because of that, or women who were on substances. We wanted to make sure that all of those things that are exploitative were dealt with.

And I know Libby and I thought very much along the same lines. And all of a sudden we found that it wasn't going to happen. The language was getting watered down by people that we thought were going to be supportive of it. At least, Réal surprised us, and then Libby said there wasn't as much of an appetite within her caucus. So both John and I--who were busy thinking, 'hello, this is what we were going to do'--went back to our caucus and said, 'Well, look, there's no appetite with these guys, we're going to lose it anyway so let's just try to find some accommodation here.'

It was not the best report that I would have liked to have seen.

XW: So if the Liberals form the next government, what will you do to decriminalize consensual sex among adults?

HF: Well, I would like to see the idea that you should equalize the age for both anal and heterosexual sex. That is something that I know we would do if we formed government again.

XW: What do you think of the Conservative bill to increase the age of consent from 14 to 16?

HF: I don't agree with it. We don't have to like it, but 14-year-olds are having sex, 13-year-olds are having sex. This is a reality. So what are we going to do? Criminalize these 13-year-olds?

We need to ask ourselves: What do we need to do to ensure that we bring up our young people to make decisions that are in their own best interests, and give them the skills and tools that they need to keep them safe? We send our children out into the world without any information. You can't keep having an ostrich mentality.

XW: Do you think the Conservatives will stay in power long enough to get it passed?

HF: That will be up to the electorate to decide.

XW: Will the Liberals vote against the bill when it comes up?

HF: We haven't discussed it. I know that we did not bring it in when we were being urged to. It was something that we felt strongly against. So it's my feeling that we will vote against it. Whether one or two people will do their own thing, as is wont to do sometimes in political parties, I don't know. I will be voting against it.

XW: Little Sister's got denied advance funding by the Supreme Court of Canada. Is it time for a Liberal government to review Canada Customs and its ability to censor?

HF: The very first time that this came out, I went to the minister of Revenue Canada at the time and we talked about this issue. And basically, the legal people said that the Butler decision [on obscenity] made it very, very clear. If people in Customs obeyed the Butler decision then they couldn't be doing the kinds of stuff they were doing with Little Sister's. It's about training Customs officials. It is about ensuring that they understand the law. It's something that I haven't seen change. How do you get Customs officials to be trained properly? I don't know.

I've been pushing that; can't get anywhere with the bureaucrats. The Liberal government cannot change the law. All we can do is say to the bureaucracy: 'Please train your people.'

XW: Which law do you mean?

HF: The Butler decision defining obscenity. Ministers are not allowed to involve themselves in how a department works or trains, and the management of the department. That is hands-off. We don't train them; the bureaucracy does.

XW: Last question: Lorne Mayencourt may be running with the Conservatives as your opponent in Vancouver Centre next election. What do you think of that?

HF: Well, somebody's going to have to run for the Conservatives. I'm just a little surprised that it's Lorne. I mean, I know Lorne, I've worked closely with Lorne. I didn't think Lorne would go for a gang like that.

XW: Why?

HF: Here is a party that voted every step of the way against every single piece of same-sex equality, who said the most heinous things in the House about gays and lesbians, bisexual and transgendered persons. Here is a government that has cut the Court Challenges Program, which brought forward the ability for case law and for the courts to be able to look at discrimination. Killed it! Killed it completely.

Killed the homelessness programs, and now said that they're putting money into something new. I don't know what that is, but they took the money away. What they're doing, which is very clever of this government, is that they take away money and then they put it back in at one-third of it. And they call it something new and say, 'See, we saw that the Liberal program is not getting results and we're putting in a new program' with less money.

How could Lorne go for a group like that? I don't get it.

Cancelling 12 out of 16 [Status of Women offices]--Vancouver no longer has a Status of Women government office. Vancouver, which has the Downtown Eastside where women are in need of protection, no longer has an office. Lorne would support these people who don't want to support the safe injection site? Who think that people who are addicted should not have access to harm reduction?

Lorne would go to these people? But if he does, I guess he's going to have to realize that he's now going to have to be responsible for all of the things that they stand for. And I'm going to hold him responsible for those policies if he runs for them.

We know that this is a leader, Mr Harper, who actually rules with an iron fist. This is not a case of, 'Well, I'm gonna go there and I'm gonna fight. I'm going to be a tough little person and fight.' The media know what he's like. Everyone is told what to do. He controls everything. Do you think Lorne is going to say, 'I'm going to go there and change Stephen Ha