Author Archives: Jay Menard

Gas Pains

Leave a reply

By Jason Menard

A few weeks ago, when I was in Montreal, the prices had risen to $1.04 per litre and I was only comforted with the thought that the cost per litre had to be less in Ontario. I knew that I would feel good about paying whatever the rates were back in London, because they couldn’t be worse than what I was paying in La Belle Province.

I’m not proud of my petroleum-fueled Schadenfreude, but it’s a fact of life that we’re willing to pay whatever price the gas companies set for us, as long as someone else is worse off! It’s all a matter of perspective. And, as I stated, paying in the low-90s is much more palatable once we’ve already broken the $1.00 ceiling.

Oh, what a difference three weeks make. We are now them. And the ridiculously high gas prices are starting to have an impact on the economy around us.

As predicted, people are now flocking to gas stations that are selling at prices that only a month ago seemed outrageous. The people who are dancing in the streets when gas falls under that buck a litre threshold are the very same who were bitching vociferously when the price of gas rose to the mid-80s.

But, more tellingly, the ancillary effect of these higher gas prices is that people are choosing to restrict their activities – to the detriment of industries that rely on the summer season and that increased revenue for their livelihood.

Several times now I have spoken to people who have decided that enough is finally enough, and their cars are going to be used only for the bare necessities – driving to work, getting groceries, and small errands. The idea of getting behind the wheel and driving out of town on a day trip just doesn’t appeal to some any longer simply because it’s hard to rationalize the financial expenditures that any sort of trip would demand.

In Canada, the summer tourist season is painfully short already. Stores, restaurants, and areas that rely upon out-of-town traffic will soon start feeling the pinch caused by cautious motorists. Add to that the fact that many people are restricting the number of little jaunts they take throughout the city, thus reducing the number of opportunities they have to engage in impulse buying – and it’s plain to see that the rising costs of gas are having an impact on and off the roads.

“Essence à Juste Prix,” a Quebec-based organization (and it’s no surprise that’s it started there, considering the premium Quebec drivers are forced to pay for their petrol), is calling for the federal government to look into the escalating costs of fuelling up. At the same time, federal transport minister Jean Lapierre has stated that the feds have no intention of dropping the taxes Canadians pay at the pump. In the interim our gas companies raise and lower their prices in unison, somehow avoiding the spectre of collusion, yet appearing by their actions to collude.

So where does that leave us? Boycotting doesn’t work because, literally speaking, the gas companies have us over a barrel. While some of the major metropolitan areas in Canada, specifically Toronto and Montreal, have efficient, timely public transportation, others of us in the country don’t have the luxury to leave our wheels at home and take advantage of alternatives.

When I lived in Montreal, I was able to cross the island in 15 minutes by commuter train and metro to get to work, which saved on a 45-minute to an hour-long drive had I tried to traverse the city. Living in London, a 10-minute drive to work would take over an hour by public transportation – and that’s assuming I don’t miss on of the oh-so-infrequent busses that run all throughout the city.

Driving is my only option. And it’s the only option of many Canadians who are forced to travel any distance to work. We can restrict, conserve, and search for alternatives all we want, but we need to find a solution.

If the federal will is not there to reduce gas taxes or place caps on prices at the pumps, then they have to divert money into public transportation. People will make the switch if the alternative is palatable. I would sacrifice an extra half-hour out of my commute if I knew that the option was there for me. But I live in a fairly sizeable urban environment. Others aren’t so lucky (or unlucky, depending on your point of view).

The answers aren’t so cut and dried – but unless some action is taken, and soon, fuelling our cars won’t be our biggest problem, fuelling our economy will.

2005 © Menard Communications – Jason Menard All Rights Reserved

Courting the Governor General

Leave a reply

By Jason Menard

Phew. I’m glad that’s over. Michaelle Jean has come out of the closet finally. After much hand-wringing and back and forth debate: Is she or isn’t she? Was she or wasn’t she? Our governor general-designate has finally come forth to say her and her husband are proud, flag-waving Canadians.

Thank goodness that’s been decided. Now the position can go back to its irrelevance and Jean can assume her place in the annals of Canadian historical trivia.

Interestingly enough, many of those who claim that Jean’s alleged support of separatist causes would undermine the integrity of the position are the very same people who were ready to abolish the whole post in response to Adrienne Clarkson’s free-spending ways during her tenure. Suddenly a position that was no more than a benign, but necessary, growth on our system of constitutional monarchy turned into a malignant growth that threatened the very political life of our Prime Minister.

While the uproar over Jean’s alleged nationalist leanings may have its basis in simple politicking, part of it reeks of our Canadian need to be loved and validated. With separatists factions gaining steam in the West due to its economic prosperity, and dissatisfaction with Jean Charest’s Liberal government fanning the flames of nationalism in Quebec, maybe those on Parliament Hill are just looking for someone to tell them they love them.

Like an insecure lover, Canadian federalists need to hear that their expressions of amour are reciprocated. There’s nothing worse than professing your love, getting hitched, and then finding out that the object of our affection has a wandering eye and her heart is somewhere else.

Of course, there are the whisperings from the Prime Minister’s camp that the seeds from which the rumours of separatist sympathy have grown were actually sown by nationalist forces in Quebec. Essentially, the idea is that sovereigntists are acting like jealous lovers — if separatism can’t have her, then nobody can. And that they don’t want to see a federalist Quebecker in a position of prominence as she may be able to effectively woo soft-separatists or swing voters in the province towards the Canadian cause.

But let me tell you, if these first few days are indicative of Jean’s tenure, then I may hop on board the pro-Governor General bandwagon. Essentially a patronage appointment, this office has long been looked down upon by many Canadians. Viewed as a necessary, but largely irrelevant, position in modern Canada, the Governor General’s office is a reminder of our Commonwealth affiliation and attachment to an absentee sovereign.

So when you combine the outgoing Governor General’s penchant for being free with the ol’ taxpayer-filled wallet with the questions over the incoming Governor General’s loyalty to our nation, maybe the motivation will be there to take a good, solid look at the role of the monarchy in our day-to-day lives.

Maybe instead of courting the Governor General, we’ll decide as a nation to walk away from the position entirely. The fact of the matter is that the Queen’s presence in this country – well, not her physical presence of course – is cause for debate in our society. While not a front-burner issue like separatism, sponsorship inquiries, or human rights, it is, nonetheless, a simmering pot heating up on the back burner.

Perhaps the passions that have been incited by our two most recent appointees will finally fan the flames of that debate and cause it to boil over. If that’s the case, we’ll finally able to engage in a nationwide debate on the role of the Governor General, the monarchy, and what it means to be a Canadian.

Then, at least, we’ll be able to say that the Governor General is far from irrelevant.

2005 © Menard Communications – Jason Menard All Rights Reserved

Justice For All — But No Carte Blanche

1 Reply

By Jason Menard

With the Linda Shaw murder case drawing to a close, many are looking at it as a case of what’s wrong with our penal system. However, combined with this summer’s release of an infamous Canadian killer, perhaps the motivation to change the system – and a partial solution – is now at hand.

Last week, the name of Linda Shaw’s killer was released to the public. Shaw, a student at the University of Western Ontario, was found murdered near London on the side of the road, and the mystery went unsolved for 15 years. DNA linked the crime to a now-deceased offender, and the case goes on the books as solved. However, at a time where Shaw’s friends and family should be able to enjoy some closure on the incident, instead they are forced to deal with a slew of questions as to how the murderer – a two-time killer out on parole – was allowed to re-enter society and re-offend. Shaw’s killer served only 12 years.

Twelve years behind bars – just like another infamous Canadian, Karla Teale, who was released earlier this summer.

As Teale re-enters Canadian society somewhere in Quebec and tries to put her past behind us, many Canadians live in fear of if and when she will strike again. The Deal with the Devil got Teal out in 12, and now there are those that are wondering who will eventually pay the price. Here’s hoping that Teale has been rehabilitated, is able to move on with her life, and put the past behind her to become a functioning, contributing member of this society. Here’s hoping that she is able to live in this world free of whatever demons drove her to commit such horrible acts in the past.

However, Teale’s release is not without strings attached. She is under strict restrictions as to when and where she can go, how often she must report to the police, and with whom she can associate. She can’t even change her hair colour without notifying the authorities.

But while Teale may protest the restrictions placed upon her since her release based on the fact that they were not part of the originally plea bargain deal, the fact of the matter is that these strict restrictions should be the norm, not the exception in Canadian justice. Any violent offender in our society should not have the slate wiped completely clean once their jail time is served. The debt to society may have been paid behind bars, but interest upon the original principal is still owed – and that must be paid off for years after their release.

Our rights in our society are not to be taken for granted. They’re earned through our actions. When you choose to act in a way that runs counter to the accepted rules, norms, and values of the society, then you have by your own actions forfeited your claims to equality. By breaking society’s rules your actions imply that they have no domain over your life – so the attempt to reclaim them and use them as the foundation upon which to build your freedom is shaky at best.

Once you have committed a crime against society, you are no longer to the same freedoms that law-abiding citizens enjoy. You’ve proven that you can’t play our game, so don’t complain when we change the rules. You do not come out of jail with a slate wiped completely clean. Prison removes you from society for a time, with the idea that you can be rehabilitated to become a functioning member of society. But that doesn’t mean that you simply can walk out the prison gates and blend into society with no transition.

Teale’s restrictions are exactly what we need to do with all violent offenders. Criminals of this sort need to be strictly watched throughout their reintegration into our society. Yes, they should be allowed to enjoy certain freedoms – the right to live their lives, but that doesn’t mean they have the right to carte blanche. They forfeited that right of their own volition.

There are those who will look at the increased financial costs that this type of continued enforcement and monitoring would require and find them prohibitive. But terms and conditions of release similar to those applied to Teale would act as a deterrent to reoffending. Our current system, while not terrible, could be improved.

When it comes to the financial costs, concerns about those must be tempered with an examination of the human costs. No system is perfect, and those who are truly driven to commit a crime will do so no matter what deterrent is in place. However, if the knowledge that committing a crime will result in a lifetime of scrutiny and forfeiture of a significant amount of freedom that we currently take for granted, perhaps that will be enough to prevent just one murder.

And if you’re still not convinced of the need to invest more, simply ask Linda Shaw’s family today if the additional costs would have been worth the chance that Shaw’s killer would not have been able to reoffend.

It’s not to say that her killer wouldn’t have struck regardless of increased scrutiny. But he may not have, and that’s more of a chance than we have right now.

2005 © Menard Communications – Jason Menard All Rights Reserved

Question of Honour or Savagery?

Leave a reply

By Jason Menard

Although the game’s played on ice, it seems that nothing heats up a Canadian’s passion than taking a critical look at the game of hockey.

Response to a column that I wrote in the Aug. 11, 2005 edition of The National Post, has been swift, passionate, and polarized. The column, which examined the questionable timing of the NHL’s reinstatement of the Vancouver Canucks’ Todd Bertuzzi on the same day as Wayne Gretzky’s announcement of his return to the game, was met with approval by some, but with vehement disapproval by others.

And what surprised me about the e-mailers who disagreed with me was not that they disagreed with the timing of the announcement, or with the actual point of my column – they were passionately opposed to the suspension in the first place, essentially saying Steve Moore, the object of Bertuzzi’s lack of affection, deserved it.

It seems that, according to the e-mailers, Bertuzzi did nothing more than avenge hockey’s karmic gods, which Moore angered by elbowing Bertuzzi’s teammate Markus Naslund. That, in the context of hockey, Bertuzzi’s actions were honourable and that he was being a stand-up teammate.

In fact, one respondent actually referred to Mr. Bertuzzi’s attack of Steve Moore as a “mild take down of the NHL’s honour code.” If Bertuzzi’s attack was mild, apparently more serious infractions should be met with death in the future.

How does the culture of hockey change when some of its fans and some of its players still ascribe to this barbaric system of retribution. The hockey gods must be of the Old Testament variety if this eye-for-an-eye honour code is how they must be appeased. And if the fans are willing to circle the wagons – or even start forming a lynch mob – to avenge their fallen heroes, then perhaps the game has deeper problems than a new CBA and a stricter enforcement of the rules can fix.

The idea of payback has been a part of hockey for generations. The Gordie Howes and Maurice Richards would dole out retribution on their own and were as tough as they were talented. Later on, the role of the enforcer developed – which explained why Dave Semenko was able to ride shotgun with Wayne Gretzky all those years – to allow the skill players to be skilled without fear of the opposing team taking liberties with them.

Bertuzzi, the player, signaled a throwback to the players of yesteryear — big, tough, talented, with hands as soft around the net as they were tough in a fight. And, it’s true that his act against Moore was done to avenge Moore’s hit on Naslund that put him out of commission. But the thing about honour is that it’s best served face-to-face. Not from behind, bulldogging your opponent to the ice face-first.

The players of yesteryear had a respect for each other. Whether it was borne from the lack of helmets or from the fact that they weren’t set for life with their rookie contract, they played the game tough, sometimes dirty, but not with the intention of blindsiding an opponent. Even the so-called goons respected the game enough to only go after each other.

The problem with the way hockey’s unspoken honour code is being interpreted is that many of the fans – and players themselves – forget that a major component of honour is respect. Respect for the game, respect for the fans, and respect for your fellow opponents.

I can understand the idea of standing up for yourself and your teammates. It’s one of the things that make this team sport so attractive – but there are limits. Just because somebody cuts my wife off on the highway doesn’t mean I get to run them off the road the next time I see them.

Hockey’s honour code does not foster the lawless society that some of the e-mailers believe. It does not allow for vigilante justice of this nature. While Bertuzzi’s intent may have been honourable, the way he enacted his frontier justice was not. Bertuzzi’s heart was in the right place, but his head and body weren’t on the same page. And even the fact that Moore was skating away from the confrontation does not justify jumping on his back.

Of course, it seems a lot of Bertuzzi fans would like nothing more to jump on Moore’s back along with him. The game of hockey is built upon the foundations of speed, beauty, and toughness – not savagery. And while honour has its place, it can’t exist without respect.

If the fans and the players lose that respect for one another, then our beloved game of hockey will devolve into nothing more than a bloodsport.

2005 © Menard Communications – Jason Menard All Rights Reserved

The Importance of a Good Beard

Leave a reply

By Jason Menard

I’ll admit it. I have facial hair envy. I, like many of you reading this, have had it since we were young and it’s a condition that will afflict us for the rest of our lives.

I dream of growing a beard. Not just a well-groomed, dainty dusting of hair along the jaw line, but a full-on, Unabomber-esque, all-encompassing facial flora! I want birds to be able to nest in my beard. I want hermits to come out of hiding and accept me as one of their own!

Of course, I also want to stay married to my wife and not scare my children, so that dream stays held in check.

I’ve been blessed/cursed with the ability to amass a solid growth of facial hair in very little time. Generally I get through life wearing a modern goatee (which is actually a van dyke – true goatees only consist of chin whiskers.) My wife prefers me with that little bit of facial hair and I hate shaving, so it’s a good compromise. But every so often, I get the urge to experiment with facial hair. To dream about what I would look like with a little more growth here and a little extra trim there.

The growing of facial hair is a right of passage for many men. When we’re younger we’re desperately hoping for those first chin whiskers to make their appearance on our face so that we can justify shaving – because shaving is cool, it’s manly, and there’s nothing more a teenaged boy is dying to be than to be manly. There may only be two little hairs poking through the skin, but they’re enough to break out the razor and cut our last ties to our youth!

Beyond the perceived need to shave, nothing signifies manhood more than finally being able to grow a noticeable amount of facial hair. Whether it’s a goatee, a van dyke, a beard, or a mustache, facial hair equals virility! Few young boys dream of growing up with a cherubesque, Dorian Grey-smooth visage. We don’t want to be classically beautiful – we want to be ruggedly handsome, and a beard is the best way we know to signify manhood.

So desperate is our desire to cling to that vision of manliness that we’ll put up with the ugliest, rattiest displays of facial scruff in the known universe. How many times have you seen some kid in their mid to late teens sporting this embarrassing, Fisher-Price-My-First-Mustache growth on their upper lip that consists of about a dozen, stringy, long hair.

Yet, while we all look on with amusement, inside that boy is standing a foot taller. His shoulders are pushed back, his chin is held high, and his confidence is soaring simply because he has a mustache. To the rest of the world his facial hair may be reminiscent of the fur on a wet dog, but to him he has a Tom Selleck-eque growth.

And speaking of Selleck, recently to celebrate a Hawaiian shirt day at work, I decided to take the opportunity to channeling my inner Magnum. I shaved off the majority of my facial hair, leaving behind only the mustache – the most maligned of facial hairs. Yet I could only handle it for a day. To my dismay I was less Tom Selleck and more Ron Jeremy. Yes, for that one day I was the not-so-proud bearer of the dreaded Pornstache! The fantasy in my head couldn’t live up to the reality on my lip.

In our minds, we can all grow the perfect beard or the divine mustache. In my youth, one of the most popular players in baseball was Rollie Fingers. And I’m positive he was revered less for his handle of a curveball, and more for his handlebar mustache. Lanny McDonald? Good player, great ‘stache! Sean Connery was dapper in his youth, but distinguished with the advent of age and a beard. As men, we see how they pull off this dramatic facial hair with flair and élan and, in a follicular leap of faith we figure that we could do the same.

But the reality is that very few of us can pull off facial hair at all – and even fewer can make the risky leap into mustache territory without looking like a used car salesman. We’d all like to think that we can sport thick, lush beards – but really most people out there are plagued with bald spots, patchy growth, and feeble growth.

So now I’ll just grow back my beloved goatee. And I’ll be content knowing that I can grow a nice, full van dyke, even if there are a few more flecks of white and grey in it than I’d like.

But I know that contentment will be short-lived. The lessons I’ve learned today will be washed away like yesterday’s whiskers, and I’ll make my next foray into follicular fantasy. After all, how hard can it be? Right?

2005 © Menard Communications – Jason Menard All Rights Reserved