Fuming? Nodding? Tell us your opinions; contact opinions @theotherpress.ca Freedom of speech threatened by new Olympic law Law to tackle “ambush marketing;” timing suspicious By Trevor Doré, Acting Opinions Editor ecently, the Province introduced R: bill to amend the Municipalities Enabling and Validating Act which will give Richmond, Vancouver and Whistler temporary bylaw enforcement powers. The legislation will allow local governments to quickly remove graffiti and signs it deems inappropriate on and in private property during the 2010 Winter Olympic Games. Authorities will be able to enter residences with only 24 hours notice to remove “unauthorized signage.” This “the bylaws will protect peoples’ right to free speech and ensure that commercial advertising is the focus of the rules. Enforcing the rules will be the job of bylaw enforcement officers, not the police, and the city won’t be seeking warrants to remove anti-Olympic signs in homes.” Once again, it is the timing and nature of the new legislation that has civil liberties groups questioning and challenging its potential implications. The Olympics have been in the works for many years now. According to the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, everyone has the fundamental right to “freedom of “Freedom of speech is freedom of speech—forget the loopholes.” includes anything from anti-Olympic messages to general advertisement and personal expression. Violators of the new legislation could face penalties of up to $10,000 and six months in jail. The government said in a statement that the changes will simply “provide the municipalities of Vancouver, Richmond and Whistler with temporary enforcement powers to enable them to swiftly remove illegal signs and graffiti during the 2010 Olympic and Paralympic Winter Games.” The law is intended to clamp down on so-called “ambush marketing.” Ambush marketing is defined as “the attempt to capitalize on the value and goodwill associated with a major event to the detriment of official sponsors.” Mayor Gregor Robertson assures thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication and freedom of peaceful assembly,” but it seems as we get closer and closer to the date, these new legislations seem to be popping up, one after the other. The legislations are proposed just in time to be in place for the Olympics but do not allow enough time for an appeal. While the legislation may have a very practical purpose, the potential implications on freedom of speech merit giving it some close attention. After all, freedom of speech is freedom of speech—forget the loopholes. Fuming? Nodding? Tell us your opinions; contact opinions @theotherpress.ca Shaking hands with danger? Despite risks of disease transmission, handshake here to stay Trevor Doré acting opinions editor making a first impression in a job interview or your simply just saying hi or goodbye to a good friend. All of these are situations that may result in a handshake. The handshake has been around for ages. While its origins are uncertain, it is said that it was used as a way to display that you were unarmed and convey mutual trust. Over time however, things have changed and the average person is now more likely to be carrying a pen rather than a sword. So, is this age-old tradition still practical? Several books have been written on the handshake—the variations, formalities and importance of this formal greeting. A good handshake is part of making a good impression. In many business settings in the western world the handshake is essential. Sports teams use the handshake as a demonstration of sportsmanship after a well-fought match. For some, the handshake is part of everyday life, for other others not so much. So what about the spread of viruses like H1N1? Is the handshake an unnecessary tisk? We have entered flu season and while the average person may not be armed with a traditional weapon, they may be armed with [Estes yourself to someone new, a more discrete danger. With the constant barrage of information about washing hands and avoiding getting sick, is it time to revamp this traditional method of meeting and greeting? I say perhaps—if you are a germaphobe. Robert W. Frenck Jr., MD and professor of paediatrics at the Cincinnati Children’s Hospital says, “In our environment, we're exposed to hundreds and hundreds of antigens a day, from dust to pollen to viruses and to bacteria. The fact is that our immune systems do very well in protecting us.” Every day we open doors use computers and telephones and some of us even ride transit, all of which expose us to a plethora of germs. Some people have proposed a ban—a complete shift away from this age-old tradition. Everything from elbow rubs to toe touches has been offered as suggested alternatives. The thing is, in order for these transitions to work everyone has to be on board. As you probably know, refusing a handshake is usually taken as an insult. Bottom line, hands can be dirty. There are many germs out there but that is no reason to go “bubble boy.” Wash your hands and try to keep them away from your face. If you are really against handshaking, politely refrain and move on. The handshake is an essential part of social interaction and I personally don’t see a mass transition away from it anytime in the near future. Talking trash What can be done about the GVRD’s garbage problems? By Trevor Doré, Opinions Editor ith the amount of garbage we produce, Oscar the Grouch probably thinks he has died and gone to heaven. Garbage cans overflowing with ubiquitous single use disposable containers—that we have come to take for granted in our everyday life—are a common sight in school hallways and on street corners. Where does all of this trash go when we “throw it away?” Where is “away” anyway? We produce so much garbage that the largest manmade structure ‘in the world is now a New York landfill. In the Lower Mainland, most of our garbage goes to a landfill where it sits for thousands of years, never fully decomposing. Garbologist Dr. William Rathje has done core sampling of landfills where he has discovered whole hot dogs and legible newspapers from many years ago. Landfills seal up the trash, preventing it from ever decomposing. Most of our garbage gets sent up to Cache Creek—out of sight, out of mind. However, there is a problem. The Cache Creek landfill is becoming a “land/ull.” With no more room to put our garbage, we are going to have to look at new solutions. Waste-to-energy plants are an option. Incinerators burn the garbage and produce electricity. Sounds good, but you know the saying: “If it’s too good to be true, it probably is.” One obvious problem with the solution is air pollution. The burning deals with the waste but creates air pollution in the process, essentially “fixing” one problem only to create another. Another problem with this solution cory is the need for a constant source of trash. In-order for waste-to-energy facilities to operate, there must be a constant flow of trash. This completely undermines Metro Vancouver’s goal of zero waste. Statistics show that Metro Vancouver currently reuses and recycles 55 per cent of the waste generated within the region. A target has been set to increase this to 70 per cent by the year 2015. With a 70 per cent diversion rate, would there be enough garbage to feed the fire? Do we want there to be enough garbage to feed the fire? Are we not trying to get away from trash abundance? Shipping our trash to another location or even another country has also been proposed. You know what they say: “One man’s trash is another man’s treasure.” Somehow, I don’t think that this idea is going to fly. Besides, if “away” were in our own back yard, perhaps we would give a little bit more thought and attention to our trash. In the end, we are going to have to find some place to put it and that might be easier if there wasn’t so much. We need to get everyone on board. Remember, the first “R” is reduce, then reuse and then recycle. They have been arranged in this order for a reason. On an individual level, one can make a difference by simply taking measures to conserve and reduce waste. Be sure to check out next week’s feature, “The cafeteria: reducing our impact” fora more in-depth look at the trash problem at Douglas College and what you as a student can do to be a part of the solution.