Guest column: Peterborough-Kawartha Liberals, Conservatives face challenging optics

BT

By Bill TemplemanGuest Columnist

Fri., Sept. 17, 2021

     https://www.thepeterboroughexaminer.com/opinion/columnists/2021/09/17/guest-column-peterborough-kawartha-liberals-conservatives-face-challenging-optics.html

Our Peterborough-Kawartha riding appears to be in no danger of losing its bellwether status, at least for unseemly campaign behaviour. While we haven’t seen the mob intimidation or the gravel-throwing of the national campaign (yet), our local campaign is nonetheless getting nasty, even by Peterborough standards.

Sign theft has reached pandemic proportions on all sides. Vulgarities are being yelled at canvassers. And both the Liberal and Conservative candidates have managed to offend opposing segments of the local punditry.

Despite Maryam Monsef’s heartfelt explanation on Facebook of her culturally-appropriate use of the term ‘brothers’ in addressing the Taliban during the fall of the now-former Afghan government, she continues to be vilified online for using this word in addressing an enemy who killed 158 of our troops during Canada’s 13-year engagement in Afghanistan.

To her credit, Monsef was attempting to speak directly to the Taliban to encourage compassion at a time when lives were on the line.

But for non-Afghan social media users, her remark was simply too easy to lift out of context. Cue the raging hordes of acerbic online critics with their scathing judgments as they questioned Monsef’s loyalty to her adopted country.

On the Conservative side, Michelle Ferreri’s campaign ran into controversy over her vaccine status. When asked, her campaign manager, Michael Skinner, replied that Ferreri had received only one shot, but was taking a daily rapid test. He said that she “would get her next shot as soon as the election is over.”

Skinner also said that Ferreri did not have the time to take three days out of her campaign schedule to get vaccinated because of the risk of side effects. As per public health guidelines, she would have not been deemed fully vaccinated until two weeks after her second jab. So, she campaigned for the first three weeks of the campaign not fully vaccinated.

Ferreri told a local news website that an item in a questionnaire sent to all candidates about vaccine status was “extremely divisive.” Then she added, “I am vaccinated.” Shortly after a CBC journalist asked Erin O’Toole about Ferreri’s vaccine status, her campaign said she would be getting her second shot later that day. She got it Saturday.

As in Monsef’s case, someone should have thought through the optics beforehand. After all, these are public health guidelines. Do these guidelines not apply to her? And what about the implications for all those with whom she had contact? Is this a huge issue, or just another petty example of “gotcha” sniping? Again, cue the legions of fulminating online critics spewing their vitriol across social media, this time from the “progressive” side of the spectrum.

So, to my prediction: Perhaps neither Monsef nor Ferreri could have done anything to avoid their respective messes. Mistakes happen. Intentions can be misread. But one thing is certain. All of us, no matter who we voted for, will have to continue to make this community work together.

If she does not win, Ferreri may well resume her media business and work with at least a few people who might not have voted for her. Monsef, should she lose, may seek a position with a local organization that is lead in part by people who may have not voted for her.

We’ll all have to put away our judgments, our cynicism and our political cudgels. We’ll all have to set aside the bitterness of this campaign. We’ll all have to resume treating each other with respect. We all have a stake in this community. As we vote, let’s not forget that we all live here. We will need everyone, regardless of political allegiance, onboard if we are to successfully face the challenges waiting for us in the future.

Bill Templeman is a writer, career coach, podcaster and consultant based in Peterborough.

 Guest Column: Of planes, pandemics and politics in Peterborough ... who to trust?

https://www.thepeterboroughexaminer.com/opinion/columnists/2021/04/23/bill-templeman-of-planes-pandemics-and-politics-in-peterborough-who-to-trust.html

If, like me, you're glad that airline executives don't make safety decisions about flights, then why aren't we mad as hell that politicians are making public safety decisions about a virus?

Full disclosure: I have no training as an aircraft mechanic or air-traffic controller; I also have no training as a doctor or epidemiologist. I have never had life-and-death responsibilities in any job; my resume is a very dull read. But these four professions carry enormous responsibilities; peoples’ lives depend on how these jobs are done.

Back in the ’90s and early 2000s, I flew between three and six times a year — not much among frequent flyers. I have often been stranded in airports due to technical difficulties. While stuck in airport lounges, I have listened to my co-travellers whine about flights delays.

I realized that I had to trust these aviation experts with my life. After all, I was about to take a seat in a long aluminum tube then be flown to an altitude of 33,000 feet for several hours, propelled through the thin air by constant explosions of highly flammable jet fuel. I told myself, “Hmmm, another flight delay? Need to make sure the plane is in good shape? Fine. Please take your time!”

How were these flight-delay decisions made? As a passenger, I believed that these decisions were made by senior flight mechanics and air-traffic controllers. I knew that the owner of my consulting firm, the CEO of their corporate client, the airline’s executives or the owner of the hotel at which I would be staying would not have any say in when or if my plane would take off.

Those flight delays had business implications, but they were not business decisions. They were safety decisions. I had to trust those aviation professionals.

Now let’s look at another journey — getting all of us safely through this pandemic. Public health restrictions regarding COVID-19 are like flight delays. Both are highly inconvenient. Both have huge safety implications. But a flight delay only affects a couple of dozen people. A public health restriction can affect millions. Both decisions have financial implications. The flight delay might mean a loss of revenue for a hotel; these losses are pocket change.

In comparison, the public health decisions being made now are having immense economic implications. Jobs are being lost. Businesses are failing. We can dispute the reasons behind either a flight delay or a pandemic lockdown, but our opinions do not matter. Nor should they. Air travellers have to trust aviation professionals to make the right decision. Only those with extensive aviation expertise should make flight-delay decisions.

The owners of consulting firms, corporate executives and hotel managers should not have any input into whether or not a flight is safe for takeoff. They know how to run businesses; they don’t know how to fly airplanes.

As a citizen stuck in this pandemic, I have to trust medical and public health professionals to make the right decisions. I would like to think the right people are making the current pandemic health decisions. But who are these right people? Only those with extensive medical and public health expertise should be deciding which pandemic strategies are best.

So why is Ontario’s premier, in obeisance to his corporate donors, making public health decisions during this pandemic? Does he have the medical and epidemiological expertise to make these decisions? Huge profits and losses hang in the balance.

We know the virus is spreading in poorly ventilated schools and crowded workplaces such as factories, distribution depots, and major construction projects. It is spreading among low-wage workers who do cannot stay home when they are sick because they need to come to work in order to get paid. Does our premier believe that sick, dying and dead workers will still show up for their shifts? Does he know that sick, dying and dead customers will not shop?

Since January, doctors in Ontario’s busiest hospitals have been posting warnings on social media about the third wave. A quick tour of Twitter and YouTube will bring up dozens of these posts. Doctors who sit on the Ontario government’s Science Advisory Table have posted their warnings. These posts are not partisan attacks; they are the well-reasoned arguments of qualified professionals, often supported by recently-complied statistics.

Why has this wealth of expert medical advice been ignored? We know the answer. Now we are seeing the catastrophic consequences. All actions must be taken to halt the spread of this virus, including factory and depot closures.

Doug Ford is fond of using the expression, “nothing is off the table.” If so, then why did expert medical advice take so long to come before business interests?

Bill Templeman is a writer, career coach, podcaster and consultant based in Peterborough.

 

Bill Templeman: Looking at the pandemic as an introvert’s ‘revenge’

BT

By Bill TemplemanGuest columnist

Thu., Jan. 28, 2021timer3 min. read 

https://www.thepeterboroughexaminer.com/opinion/columnists/2021/01/28/bill-templeman-looking-at-the-pandemic-as-an-introverts-revenge.html

Like Bernie Sanders’ mittens, pandemic fatigue has now become a stale meme that needs to be retired.  Every day brings new complaints in the media about the emotional stress of the never-ending lockdowns. There is always grumbling about the perceived irrationality of public-health regulations.  Then there are the testy rants about politicians who beg us to carry on with our reluctant self-denial while more than a few of them do otherwise.  From those who are fortunate enough to be able to work from home or study online, there is incessant grouching about living on Zoom.  Pandemic fatigue.

Remember this catchy tweet from the early days of the pandemic?  “Your grandparents were asked to fight World War II.  You are being asked to stay home, sit on your couch and watch NetFlix”.  Unfair?  Of course.  There is much more to surviving this pandemic than sitting at home and watching movies.  Many have lost jobs.  Savings are being drained.  Household debt is climbing. Businesses have folded. Many will not re-open.  There are undeniable hardships.  Food banks are being emptied.  Households that were getting by on multiple incomes are now having to limp by on one income -- if they are lucky.  The pain is real.  But for introverts like me, there is also private jubilation.  We can now mutter, “At last, everyone else has to live like us.”

We introverts are not naturally gregarious and socially skilled like those loud, domineering extroverts we can never be.  For me, this predisposition led to a lifetime of faking it.  Daydreaming.  Making it up.  In elementary school, I would retreat into a fantasy world by telling myself stories rather than work on math assignments.  These stories were often elaborate adventures in which I always played a heroic role, defying all odds and vanquishing wicked enemies in mortal combat.  Whenever repetitive work or mathematical concentration was required, my imagination would kick into high gear.  Time would disappear.  I could withdraw for hours at a time.  These ruminations served me well as a young reader.  They also helped me avoid math homework. 

In university, I longed for 24-hour libraries, where I could hide from my loneliness in an imagined aura of academic companionship.  In a library, we introverts could be alone with others.  I went to the libraries for as long as they were open. Not so much to study.  Just so I could not be alone.  The fog of intense introversion began to lift in my 20’s thanks to summer jobs and wilderness travel.  I gradually discovered I did not always have to live in my imagination.

Not that being a career introvert means enduring a life sentence of solitary suffering; many of us have partners and families.  Many introverts have very active imaginations that lead to compatible careers based on individual creativity.  Being an introvert means that whenever daily work becomes dull or unbearable, there is always somewhere else to go.   

This pandemic has compelled everyone to live like an introvert.  ‘Alone time’ has become our new social norm.  As a student, I was racked by feelings of loneliness.  Now it no longer matters that I am on no one’s “A” list.  Everyone stays at home every night of the week.  The pandemic has become a magnifying mirror that reflects all our flaws.  For extroverts, the pandemic exposes their dependence on others and their need for the applause that comes with living life at centre-stage. For us introverts, the distress of these extroverts is a source of smug satisfaction; our resentment of these drama stars has now become a source of delicious schadenfreude* (the joy evoked by the pain of other’s suffering).  This pandemic is the moment for us introverts to stand tall.  For once we are the envied role models. Now is the time to strut our stuff. Hear us (oh, so discretely) roar! 

======================================

Bill Templeman is a writer, podcaster and consultant in Peterborough, Ontario.

 

Effects of wartime spy plan can be seen in offices today

BT

By Bill TemplemanGuest Columnist

Wed., Sept. 23, 2020timer3 min. read

https://www.thepeterboroughexaminer.com/opinion/columnists/2020/09/22/bill-templeman-effects-of-wartime-spy-plan-can-be-seen-in-offices-today.html

What can we learn about organizational politics from the most successful Allied deception of the Second World War?

“Operation Mincemeat,” by Ben Mcintyre, is a meticulously researched book, and also an unintended case study of organizational politics in the 21st century.

What was Operation Mincemeat? In the winter of 1943, the tide had turned in the North African campaign. The Allies were pushing the enemy back and were planning to invade occupied Europe. Sicily was the assumed target for this invasion; this attack would be the largest amphibious invasion in history. But the Axis powers had anticipated this attack and were fortifying their positions in southern Italy. The Allies needed a distraction. They needed to convince the Germans that the invasion would not land in Sicily.

British analysts knew that Hitler feared an invasion of Greece, and for good reason. A landing in Greece could become the lower arm of a huge vice that could trap the Germans on the eastern front between an army from North Africa and the advancing Soviets. How could the British convince the Germans that this invasion would land in Greece, and not Sicily? British spy agents devised an audacious scheme.

The plan started with an unclaimed body in London. The body was dressed in the uniform of a Royal Marine officer, and a briefcase was handcuffed to his wrist. This briefcase held letters between senior British commanders describing a plan for an Allied invasion of Greece. A wallet containing shopping receipts, ticket stubs, fake identification, a picture of a girlfriend and even a love letter was planted on the body. This body was released from a Royal Navy sub off the Spanish coast. A sardine fisher picked it up and informed authorities.

The Spaniards, neutral but supportive of the Nazis, notified the German embassy. Wishfulness then took over; Nazi intelligence agents believed the plans for an invasion of Greece. Eager to please Hitler, these agents made sure that copies of these concocted plans were soon on their Fuhrer’s desk. When the invasion of Sicily took place in July 1943, Hitler had reinforced his army in Greece with five Panzer divisions to wait for an invasion that never came. The Germans had swallowed this deception hook, line and sinker. Why?

Adm. John Godfrey, the former director of Britain’s Naval Intelligence Division, identified two major weaknesses of the Nazi espionage bureaucracy: “wishfulness” and “yesmanship.” Wishfulness is the tendency to believe whatever supports a favoured worldview while simultaneously rejecting all contradictory views. Godfrey believed that the Nazi high command, when presented with two contradictory analyses, would believe the option that best matched their preconceptions.

Yesmanship is the tendency of those with less power to agree with those who have greater power, mainly out of ambition, but also out of fear. In organizations which have dire consequences for defying authority, like the Nazi command bureaucracy, wishfulness can give rise to deadly levels of yesmanship.

When I read Godfrey’s analysis, it struck me that his dynamics of wishfulness and yesmanship are still at work in every organization I have ever been a part of, either as a client, an employee, a contractor or a consultant.

How can we inoculate ourselves against wishfulness and yesmanship? Our intuition tells us when we are in an organization that is too careful. An extreme sense of cautiousness, combined with a paralyzing fear of sending the wrong message can stifle innovation. Do we understand the costs of being too careful?

Wishfulness and yesmanship can sabotage any organization. Only vigilance, a willingness to take risks and authentic trust can stop self-deception from becoming a gateway to self-destruction.

How to deliver bad news

BT

By Bill TemplemanGuest Columnist

Sun., Aug. 23, 2020timer4 min. read

https://www.thepeterboroughexaminer.com/opinion/columnists/2020/08/23/bill-templeman-how-to-deliver-bad-news.html

I meet lots of people who have just been told bad news. I work as an outplacement counsellor. That means that right after your manager tells you that you are losing your job and gives you a large envelope containing your severance package, you meet me. I don’t actually tell you the bad news. Your manager does that. But part of my job is to deal with your reactions, which, as you can imagine, vary widely. For some people, this news is a relief. For others, it is a complete surprise. Sometimes, it is a deep sense of humiliation. And occasionally it triggers damaging anger. For some, this news signals a joyful rebirth. Or it can trigger waves of grieving. And everything else in between.

Most people receiving this bad news generally bounce back, given enough time. It can be a painful process, but not an uncommon one. In time, most move on and regain their composure. They work through a program online and have coaching sessions with me. The length of their program depends on their former employer.

But what about their manager, the one who has to deliver the bad news? How much of my time do they get in order to deliver their dreaded message? Maybe five minutes. I wish I could coach them on how to deliver bad news. But there is no time or budget for this. These managers are thrown into the deep end. But if I could coach a manager about to fire an employee, what would I say?

I remember working with a vice-president of operations in a large firm; he had to tell his director of information technology that she no longer had a job. All he had to do was deliver the message, summarize the reasons behind his decision, explain the role of his human resources manager in this termination, mention that career coaching was part of the severance package, then leave the room. The HR manager would then review the severance package, answer any questions, then text me to enter the room.

After clarifying what I call the choreography of this meeting (the location, the timing and how to get the employee out of the building), I asked if he had any questions. He asked a question I seldom hear: How could he get ready to fire a colleague? Caught off guard, I paused then came up with, “Be fully present.” Fine. But what does “be fully present” really mean?

You need to grasp as much of the context of this bad news for the recipient as you can. Who are they? How old are they? What is their life situation? Where do they live? Who do they live with? What do you know of the recipient’s support network? And what does your intuition tell you about this person’s possible reaction?

You must do whatever you can to arrive in the moment, and be fully in the present. You are about to deliver news that will hurt. If you were the recipient, what would you need to hear? And how would you like to be told?

Being fully present is an advanced state of awareness. This is not a moment of self-forgetfulness. You don’t become smaller in these moments. This is a moment of self-transcendence. But how to get there?

Be aware of your body and how you feel right now. Look at your surroundings. What ambient sounds do you hear? Focus on your breath. Focus on your feelings. If you feel guilty or regretful, own those feelings. Rehearse what you are going to say, then throw away your script. Avoid clichés that are more about you than the person receiving the bad news. “I am sorry to have to tell you that….” or “I know this will be as difficult for you as it is for me, but…” has much more to do with you than the recipient. This is not about you.

How to deliver the bad news? Speak the words. Stick to the facts. Stick to the information the recipient has to understand right now. Offer concise explanations. Offer help. Mention resources. Be compassionate. Offer insight. Offer kindness. But deliver your core message. Do not attempt to sugar-coat a bitter pill. Become one with the situation, you and the person to whom you are delivering the bad news. You and the person you are working with are not two separate entities. Both of you are together in this situation. Fully inhabit this situation. Own it. Wear it like a warm coat in a winter storm.

What you say, beyond the basic message, will probably have little effect. How you say it will matter more. But most of all, how you are in the moment will have the greatest impact. Be fully present.

Bill Templeman is a writer, career coach, podcaster and consultant based in Peterborough, Ontario.

 

Has anything changed in Peterborough since last year’s opioid summit?

BT

By Bill TemplemanGuest Columnist

Thu., July 16, 2020timer3 min. read

https://www.thepeterboroughexaminer.com/opinion/columnists/2020/07/16/bill-templeman-has-anything-changed-in-peterborough-since-last-years-opioid-summit.html

On July 11, 2019, Peterborough’s Mayor Diane Therrien and Selwyn Township Deputy Mayor Sherry Senis hosted an open town-hall meeting at Market Hall on the opioid crisis.

The Examiner reported on the same day (Grateful to be alive, ex-addict says overdose was wake-up call, July 12) that this meeting, billed as a summit on Peterborough’s opioid crisis, was attended by many politicians: Ontario NDP Leader Andrea Horwath, MP Maryam Monsef, MPPs Dave Smith, Michael Tibollo and Dave Piccini, almost all of Peterborough’s city councillors and Oshawa’s Mayor, Dan Carter.

According to the Examiner, Dave Smith said, "I'm going to take a lot of political heat, being a Conservative and standing behind Peterborough's application for a safe-consumption centre," he said. "But this is not partisan. Every single person who overdosed and died was someone's child."

I was at Market Hall for that summit; I heard Smith speak. His words seemed heartfelt. This didn’t seem to be just another throwaway line of political theatre.

There was a palpable sense of momentum coming out of that summit. Everyone knew the severity of Peterborough’s opioid problem. Up until July 11 of last year, 19 people had died. A total of 30 people were suspected to have died from overdoses in 2019. So far this year, close to 25 people are believed to have died due to overdoses. We are only a few weeks into the second half of the year. The urgency of this problem is still huge. But what has happened to our political will? Where is that safe-consumption site that Smith said was so desperately needed?

What can researchers tell us about safe consumption sites? Do they work? In a July 9 Examiner article (Too little action on overdoses, say Peterborough safe consumption advocates), Donna Rogers, director of Fourcast, a community addiction treatment agency, said: “safe consumption sites across the country have been shown to be able to save lives when people use them to inject drugs.”

But fear can quash research findings. A petition has been set up to convince MPP Smith to push for a ban on safe consumption sites in Peterborough. In the same Examiner article of July 9, petition organizer Mackenzie Darrington says: “A safe injection site will bring more people into Peterborough with addictions, ultimately adding to the amount of drug users in the city.” But this fear is not supported by research.

Education is key to understanding, and understanding leads to attitude change. A week after last year’s summit at Market Hall, I hosted a panel discussion on Trent Radio with Salvaterra, Deputy Chief Tim Farquharson, Coun. Kemi Akapo, Alex Bierk and Andrew. Alex and Andrew both have lived experience of opioid use. This panel discussion is available online as two podcast episodes; these episodes could be useful for those who did not attend the summit last July. To listen to this discussion, divided into two 25-minute segments, go to: www.pintsandpolitics/ptbopodcasters.ca.

There are other steps we could take as a community. Opioid abuse is an illness; we could start by reducing the stigma that is dumped on users. A few local doctors could administer a safe supply so that opioid users would at least know what they are putting into their bodies. The hours of the Rapid Access Addiction Medicine (RAAM) Clinic could be extended to the times when people are more likely to need help.

I continue to be grateful that these five panellists took the time to have this discussion last July. I continue to be dumbfounded that their message is just as relevant today as it was 12 months ago. What will change in the next year? Or will Peterborough celebrate this grim anniversary every July?

To see my book, click here  then click on the Google Preview button to browse the first 25%  
Find me via email: info(at)ascentassociates(dot)ca or visit my website or blog 
_________________________________________________________________________________

Canada’s Arctic Today

Click here for the original edition as published in Trent University's alumni magazine, Fall 2018, page 12

Bill Templeman

The challenges facing the residents of Canada’s Arctic tend to escape our notice in the information-saturated south. We may see a news item online about a dramatic search and rescue, or read a post about the impact of climate change on Northern hunters, but the kaleidoscope of the 24-hour news cycle quickly scrambles our impressions, and our moment of insight is soon lost. If we could get beyond the tweets and the video clips, what would Northerners tell us? What is actually happening in the Arctic right now? What are the top priority issues for the people who live there? How are we, as a country, dealing with these challenges? Are we seeing any successes? And what can we learn from our efforts that might help Northerners as we move into the future? We have to keep wrestling not only with what to do, but overcome our biases about how we work with Northerners. Past governments have had a tendency to develop solutions to Northern problems here in the southern parts of the country, then ship those Southern solutions to the North, only to scratch our heads in puzzlement when the solutions don’t work as planned.

TRENT Magazine reached out to Trent alumna Sarah Cox ’85, who is the director, Circumpolar Affairs Directorate of the Department of Intergovernmental and Northern Affairs and Internal Trade in the federal government, as well as the head of the Canadian Delegation for Sustainable Development Working Group of the Arctic Council. We hoped to draw on Sarah’s extensive experience in project collaboration with Northerners to find out what all Canadians can do to help Northerners discover their way forward in very uncertain times. Where do we all stand right now? As a nation, how are we doing in our stewardship of the Arctic?

Sarah Cox (SC): It is important to understand that while I have worked on Northern issues for 8 years, worked in partnership with northerners and I have travelled up there, I am not a Northerner. First of all, there is the sheer vastness of the place. There are about 200,000 people in the Arctic, yet it represents 40% of Canada’s landmass. There are four Inuit regions in Canada’s Arctic. While everyone has heard of Nunavut, there is also Inuvialuit (the northwestern part of the Northwest Territories), Nunatsiavut (Northern Labrador), and Nunavik (Northern Quebec). All four are settled land claims, which is pretty progressive.TRENT Magazine (TM): 64% of Canadians live within 100km of the US border—and the vast majority of Canadians live closer to the United States than the Arctic. While we consider ourselves a northern nation, most Canadians don't have a firm grasp of life up North or the issues that Northern Canada is currently facing. Could you give us snapshot of the North as you know it?

The cultural reality of the Inuit is that they lived in seasonal camps until the 1960s, which means there are a lot of middle-aged people who grew up in these camps, not in communities with houses and streets as we know them in the South. Of the 53 permanent communities, most of them are fly-in only. There is no road access. The Inuit travel between settlements on snowmobiles; these trips can take two days or more. The cost of living is 80% higher than in the South. There is a very short ocean shipping season. Inuktitut is the strongest Indigenous language in the country; this is important because we know that language is a major anchor for culture. The median age of the Inuit is 18 years younger than the Canadian median age, so there is a burgeoning youth population.

The North is so diverse in terms of landscape, language, and people. There are a lot of different dialects. The Northwest Territories is treed, whereas Nunavut is above the treeline; these are very different landscapes. One of the things that strikes you is when you fly into Nunavut, you are flying over ice for a very long time. The remoteness of the Arctic is truly dramatic. That’s my snapshot of the North; it’s very beautiful in a very unique way. While you might call it rugged, in the summer you can walk across the tundra and fill your belly on blueberries. I am completely enamoured of the North, having travelled up there quite of few times.

TM: What are some of the current hot-button Arctic issues for the people who live there?

SC: Obviously a no-brainer is climate change; we all know that the Arctic is an early indicator of climate change. We all know about the melting sea ice. Hopefully every Canadian knows that the Arctic is facing serious challenges because of climate change.

Reconciliation is another top issue. While reconciliation is a big issue for the federal government, this reconciliation must go far deeper than government policy statements; all Canadians need to get involved in this reconciliation dialogue with the Inuit and First Nations of the Arctic.

Mental wellness and suicide prevention are huge issues. Suicide rates are very high in the Arctic, approximately 12 times the rate in Southern Canada. Our minister has described suicide in the North as an epidemic. Everyone in the Arctic knows someone who has committed suicide. From my perspective, one of the challenges is to discover how Southerners can collaborate with Northerners to support mental wellness. What works, what doesn’t work and how do we know? This is something that will take generations. There is likely nothing more important than this in terms of collaboration. There are so many issues driving this suicide rate, such as colonization, relocation of Inuit families in the ’50s, and the impact of the residential schools.

Housing is a huge issue for sure. There is overcrowding, which contributes to a lack of mental wellness, an inability to do homework and poor health. One person catches a cold and the whole house gets sick. Other issues include connectivity, better infrastructure, and that the whole North depends on diesel. This technology needs to be replaced. There is a lot of interesting planning going on with renewable energy.

Another issue is education outcomes for high school graduates. The curriculum that is being used needs to be looked at. The government of Nunavut has developed some very good curriculum that is more appropriate for the North.

There is also a steadily growing international interest in the Arctic. How we manage this interest is a discovery process. How do we manage that interest in a way that is beneficial to Northerners? A lot of states that you would never think might be interested are getting involved: China, Singapore, the Netherlands, Germany; they are not Arctic states but they’re very interested in Arctic research. Some of this interest is related to resource extraction, but not all. There is research interest in traditional ways of life and in pure scientific research. There is also research interest in shipping routes.

How, as a country, are we dealing with these hot-button issues?

SC: That’s a huge question! There are postgraduate programs on this topic and books have been written, hundreds of books. There are so many government departments that are doing innovative work in collaboration with Northerners. The ministries of the environment, fisheries and oceans, natural resources, emergency preparedness, and intergovernmental affairs, plus others, have extensive programs in the North. The development of a new Arctic and Northern Policy Framework in partnership with territories, provinces and Indigenous governments helps to provide a useful context. This policy framework is precedent-setting, in part because it is the product of co-development.

Another concern is that Canadians really don’t have access to the North. It is so wildly expensive to get there. If you are faced with a choice between vacationing in Costa Rica, Europe or the Canadian Arctic, the Arctic will not win very often. But it would be great if more Canadians could get up to experience the Arctic. Canadians have to stop thinking of the Arctic as an uncharted frontier. The Inuit have lived up there for thousands of years. They know the landscape, the environment and the culture extremely well.

TM: What is working well right now?

SC: I can’t speak to the work of all the other departments of the government. The amount of detail would be huge. But I can speak to the work of the Arctic Council. The Council is an intergovernmental body that promotes the environmental, social and economic sides of sustainable development in the Arctic. One of the keys to success of the Arctic Council is that it is a consensus-based organization. A second success factor is the fact that the Council has six Indigenous organizations from across the global Arctic as permanent members, so deliberations are always grounded in the lived reality of the people for whom all projects are intended to serve. A third success factor is the practice of integrating local knowledge and experience into all decision making. The Arctic Council is not about Southerners telling Northerners, “This is what you have to do…”. The Council is all about generating Northern solutions for Northerners, not Southern solutions for Northerners.

Canada plays a vital role on the Arctic Council, a role for which all Canadians, regardless of where they live, should be proud. If Canada was not at this table, we would be really missed.

One of the Council’s six working groups focuses on sustainable development in terms of living conditions and how to improve the lives of Arctic residents. This group, the Sustainable Development Working Group (SDWG), is evolving from doing a lot of best-practice work and research to designing and running projects that actually make a difference for Northerners living in their communities. One of my key functions is to serve as delegation head for the SDWG. My role is to work with the eight member states and six circumpolar Indigenous organizations to improve the lives of Northerners. We deal with the social sciences, not the natural sciences.

One of SDWG’s current projects is the Arctic Renewable Energy Network Academy (ARENA). Every community in Canada’s Arctic is dependent on diesel fuel for heat and electricity. One of the goals of ARENA is to foster the development of renewable-energy-literate community members. These advocates can go back to their communities, assess their local situations and determine which alternative energy solution might be best. These graduates of ARENA have the tools to get a local project set up and find out who they have to partner with in order to get renewable energy into their communities.

What is happening now that is very encouraging is that there is a growing awareness that many projects have a long time-cycle. Particularly in areas like mental health, the project cycle needs to be long, maybe ten years or more. Another exciting trend is that the six-member circumpolar Indigenous groups are beginning to put their own project concepts forward. This is fantastic, because now we can follow their lead.

We also have strong relationships with a number of academics. These relationships open up the possibility of new project ideas and the sharing of successes across all the groups.

Another successful SDWG project is a suicide prevention program focused on developing a digital resource of Inuit youth experiences with suicide. This project, which is run by youths across the Canadian Arctic, takes full advantage of the emergence of a talented pool of local filmmakers and videographers. The output of this program provides youth with a powerful, digitalized resource, created by people their own age, in their own language, and of their own culture.

We are using the power of networks or clusters to build sustainable change. For example, food security is a huge issue across the Arctic. There is a shortage of food that is nutritious and affordable. So we are developing networks of people who are working on food issues and coming up with ideas and solutions they can share using the traditional foods.

SC: Another huge question! We need to collaborate more and enter into equal partnerships with Arctic residents. Above all else, we need to listen. Gone are the days where “made in Ottawa” solutions are shipped north for implementation without extensive input from those for whom these solutions have been designed. We need to learn more about the Arctic, and if possible, go up there. The Arctic Council and the SDWG need to do a more thorough job of communicating with Northerners and with the rest of Canada about the challenges and successes that are coming out these efforts. Southerners and others who are working with Arctic residents need to remember to always respect local experience and to value local knowledge. The Arctic needs Southerners to be ambassadors for them.TM: What more do we need to do?

Another positive development to keep track of is the growth of programs at universities like Trent that concentrate on the Arctic. These university programs lead to growth in career options for working on the full range of issues in the Arctic. Grads shouldn’t eliminate the possibility of working on northern Arctic issues. It is so engaging. The North is really a microcosm of government. Every portfolio you can think of—health, housing, education, employment, social services, economic development, resource management, environmental protection—they are all here. Whatever your interests are, you could find a way to work on them in the North.