Opinions

Have an opinion? Contact us at opinions @theotherpress.ca @

Diversity, or reversed discrimination?

Vancouver Police Department’s diversity policy misses the point

a

7 ‘

nr Be ; ze he . <=

Pg Oe ie

By David Hollinshead, Staff Writer

( “Tort has long been praised for its focus on creating a multicultural nation, but is

it possible that while striving too

hard for this ideal mentality, we’ve begun to favour diversity over what best serves our country? To explain this controversial viewpoint, it is necessary for me to include my

experience that inspired such a

question.

At this year’s career fair, | was eager for the opportunity to seek advice from the Vancouver Police Department. I have long admired those who serve our communities

a “se

% | oS

VANCOUVER

CE

as police officers, so | hoped that someone would point me in the right direction of one day landing a career in the law enforcement field. An officer provided me with great advice of where to go and what to do, but included a thought that left a bruise on my mind.

As a white male, my chances are greatly lessened if I were competing against someone of a different ethnic background. Even if I were a better candidate for the position, due to a diversity rule, I would lose out.

I'd like to know that the officers patrolling the streets are of top quality and aren’t being held

t=

back because they appeared to be

a majority. The officials making the decisions surrounding the recruitment and hiring process are more concerned with creating a diverse image, even if it means that excellent candidates are being brushed to the side.

A blind eye is also turned to the amount of work that a Caucasian male puts in, which is completely unfair. The choice should be made around who the better candidate is, the one who puts in more work. The person who shows the most promise and passion should be selected just like any other public service. One suggestion I was given was to get another job working in a jail, and work my way up. Essentially it’s a longer, more roundabout way to achieve the same position as someone else—just because of my skin colour.

Granted, it is advantageous to any organization to incorporate a variety of individuals from different countries, religions, and backgrounds to gain a wider range of perspectives, but by basing the decision on what qualifies as diverse on appearances alone is incredibly ineffective. South Africa,

Europe, the UK, Australia, and New Zealand (to name a few) are all parts of the world outside of North America where you'll find Caucasian males. Candidates from these parts of the world will bring with them new perspectives and ideas just as any Asian, Indian, or African person would. Yet they would be branded a white male and therefore be hindered in their career journey, regardless of their abilities. Similarly, citizens who may appear ethnic could actually be several generations more Canadian than their Caucasian counterparts, and therefore are offering an identical set of values as your average Canadian.

I have always considered myself lucky to live in a country where so many different cultures are accepted and celebrated. I feel as though men and women— regardless of their ethnicity— should be offered positions in the VPD based on if they are the best possible candidate. If I should decide to put my heart, time, and devotion into pursuing a career in policing, all that I expect is to be offered the same opportunity as any other applicant.

Like my parents always told me: don’t judge a bill by its title

Strategically misleading names are a government's best friend

By Jacey Gibb, Opinions Editor

hat’s in a name? If you're one of the pieces of proposed legislation

making headlines lately, there might be more to you than meets the eye, as the true intentions of many bills are cleverly hidden under ridiculous labels.

The one most relevant to British Columbians right now is obviously Bill 22, or the “Education Improvement Act.” The bill recently passed, forcing an end to the teachers strike and making future strikes punishable by massive fines.

Since I’m currently working towards becoming a teacher myself, you could argue that I’m a tad biased against the bill, but I think my resistance comes primarily from me having common sense. Removing the cap on classroom capacities and lifting restrictions on the number of students with disabilities allowed per classroom? In no way will this “improve” the education system. Students aren’t sardines, so they shouldn’t be crammed into a classroom like such.

Another hunky dory sounding

16

bill to pass recently was the “Safe Streets and Communities Act,” better known as the omnibus crime bill. To sum Bill C-10

up in its most basic form, the Harper Government will now

be enforcing harsher penalties and, while exact budgetary numbers are impossible to peg, will cost Canadians upwards of $1 billion. In 2011, Statistics Canada reported that crime in Canada was on a downward trend, with attempted murders being at

their lowest numbers in 30 years. But apparently these “facts” are meaningless, because the country needs to protect its “streets and communities” more than ever.

But the worst offender of gift-wrapping legislation to win support would undoubtedly be the recently proposed Bill C-30, known infamously as the “Protecting Children from Internet Predators Act.” You know, the one that Vic Toews so elegantly defended by stating that a member of Parliament could either “stand with us or with the child pornographers.” The statement has been ridiculed beyond the point of humour, so I'll

COM Camel

leave poor Vic alone, but did you know that the bill was originally titled the “Lawful Access Act?” The name was changed at the last minute—but for what possible reason? Simply put, people like protecting children from pedophiles, so who would oppose a bill that claims to defend them? The same person that realizes that the proposed laws are invasive and make a cornucopia of personal information readily available to the police without the need for a warrant. I don’t know about you,

but I like my privacy.

Bills C-30, C-10, and 22 are only a few examples of how the government attempts to deceive Canadians. Names are completely arbitrary, and a bill’s contents is what should draw the most attention. If the government were to propose something called “The Cupcakes and Sunshine Act,” would you just assume that this meant more Vitamin D and baked goods for everyone? No? Then quit gobbling up every bill title as if it were truth.