11 November 2011

Dear Madame Lemay;

We attended your presentation at the National Archives on 8 Nov 2011 and certainly appreciated your leadership and personal interest in offering such an open invitation to participate in our future.  What a great example of participatory democracy.  You have our sincere thanks and best wishes.  We believe that together we can make a difference.

As decisions and directions will have far reaching consequences in our lives, we consider it important to contribute our voice and support.  In accepting your invitation, we suggest taking a page from our First Nations.  Of all possibilities, we may wish to ask ourselves what are the four directions that have the most heart for us and might yield the most benefit.  This may well involve directions towards becoming a vibrant international city, a city of community, a capital city, and a city of strong values.  We want to be a city that sets an example for Canadians and the world.

 We believe that becoming a community is more than roads, development, green spaces and festivals.  We are more than tulips, the canal and Winterlude.  We are more often people who relate to the NCC in terms of expectations and demands and who often insist that the NCC provide for their interests and needs.  At the level of residents, we believe community should be about respect, harmony and caring for one another.  It is about fostering the dignity of an amazing diversity of cultures and religions in Ottawa and about all residents being able to live well in the company of others. It is about a healthy partnership and relationship with government.

Perhaps our approach to dialogue, understanding, consultation, conflict resolution, consensus, or decision making needs to reflect a broader and more participative relationship.  We suggest that leading edge community development would engage its residents around three questions:

•  What do you need?
• What can you do for yourselves?
• What help do you need from others? (such as from the NCC)

At this presentation, needs were expressed from Victoria island, Lansdowne, Marsh Highlands and the cost to use cross country ski trails.  The result seemed certainly a one way conversation to NCC who were pressed to respond to what are often no-win and multi jurisdictional issues, and in a future of declining funding resources.

For example, on the ski trails issue, what if the NCC had suggested that if resident groups could maintain the trails, it can be no cost or low-cost to them.   NCC could provide the space and access at no cost, and save on maintenance costs.  Now we have a partnership. On the Victoria Island issue, if the cost of a healing center on Victoria Island is prohibitive, what if we provide the First Nations the free use, or acknowledge their ownership, of Victoria Island? Could they fundraise and build whatever structures they need?  I’m sure they could.

We believe that for people to be a real community that we need to be able to connect, meet and talk. The contributions of NCC may be to provide the public square, where open and responsible expression can occur, where elected officials can comfortably participate, and where all are taken seriously.  We need to be a city where such occurrences as “Occupy Ottawa”, can be in the context of normal, peaceful, responsible and constructive dialogue.

 Becoming an international city is an initiative in which we feel NCC has touched our cherished values and needs for making a difference in the world.   We believe this is a tremendous opportunity and you have our complete support.  This aspiration speaks to our deepest values.  We noted the slide in your presentation of the monument that had inscribed “In the service of peace.”  This we feel is what this city is uniquely positioned to represent and offer to the world.  We can be a place where the global community can meet and talk in a safe and respectful community.  The challenge will be more than assertions or aspirations; it will require engagement and involvement.  We believe that this is worthy of what a capital city should mean.

We believe that activities relating to the reduction of conflict and the relief of suffering are cherished by Canadians. We are a city reflecting a Nobel peace prize for peacekeeping and peace building, a city with a tradition of voice and volunteerism in the cause of peace.  We are a city where the international community and its embassies are already in Ottawa.   We are a city of many peace groups, of many peace building NGOs and civil society groups, university conflict centers, the Canadian Department of Peace Initiative, an emerging Civilian Peace Service among many others.  We are a city with First Nations contributing strong traditions of peace, land and spirituality.  What if we engage the world by creating a Peace Centre, where dialogue, peace and conflict resolution conferences and events can be held? On Parliament Hill, we have a Peace Tower and we have an annual Mayoral proclamation of Ottawa being a City of Peace.  This should mean something concrete to our city and the world.

To summarize, we believe that the current relationship with residents, municipal and regional government and the world would benefit from such a sense of identity and balance in our city.

We are prepared to put our time and skills to the great possibilities that are before us.  We are prepared to offer our assistance to you in the cause of our shared future.  If you wish to further discuss any issues raised, we would be most pleased to meet with you or your staff at your convenience.

Our sincere thanks and best wishes for our future;

Paul Maillet

and

Pamela Schreiner

Joanne Mantha

Maya Bobrowska

Iman Ibrahim

Bill Bhaneja

Dr Peter Stockdale

Dr Qais Ghanem

Gord Breedyk

Dr Jason Bailey

Pierre Chénier

CC:  Mayor Jim Watson  Mayor of Ottawa

CC: Mayor Marc Bureau Mayor of Gatineau

CC:  National Chief Shawn A-in-chut Atleo Assembly of First Nations

 Ref; www.horizon2067.ca

There is no doubt that the recent Canadian decision to extend its mission represented a lost opportunity for Canada to seriously consider to discontinuing Canada’s involvement in the bombing and reshape our response to the better relief of suffering and to the reduction of conflict.   Where was Canadian leadership in the development of practices and response to the R2P “responsibility to protect” doctrine that better reflects the intent of the UN mandate.   It was a mandate to PROTECT, to stop the violence,  to care for those suffering.   This means neutrality, the creation of safe spaces and  eventual reconciliation or justice.  This means  soldiers and sharing the risk.   The care for others above all.

We need to reclaim our reputation for leadership in the world and the two Nobel peace prizes we share for peacekeeping.

Paul Maillet

There can be no doubt that it is the striving and effort we put in towards what we believe in, our commitment to the greater good, our living our values, is what
truly defines who we are. We reached out and touched many people for the better. The many really good people I met give me real hope for us all. We have
many successes. We did very well in the debates and ran a much better campaign than last time. The media was fair and receptive to us and provided us with
great coverage. We were included in everything. I believe that we can say that we are now a real part in this community.

It will take some time to reflect on what happened. The green party has made a beginning with a seat for Elizabeth May, but most of us were caught in the NDP surge. We lost half our votes. The party went from 940,000 to less than 600,000 votes. Harper may now cut the per vote subsidy. This will require some tough choices, for us and the Liberals and the Bloc. We will need some critical and innovative thinkers to meet the challenges of tomorrow. Certainly Canadians have spoken for a majority and the future will be very different as a result. Canada took a big step backward from separation. With every vote comes a responsibility for those votes. I am concerned about the drift in values in parliament and our international reputation. Hopefully, Canadians will be more far more critical
and assertive, given the power a majority accrues in parliament under our electoral system.

In the long term, how we win, is how we make a difference in the community and the nation. Democracy should not be reserved for one day every four years. We do not have to be elected to be engaged in our future and to bring our values and voice into the community or into politics. We will do this. This is how riding associations are built, between elections.

We greens do have a future. Canada has a future, but Canadians have to take a more active interest in the government and what we are doing at home and abroad. Secrecy and obstruction must be challenged at every step. Accountability is now more than ever, in the hands of ordinary Canadians.

I am proud to know you all and call you friends. Again my sincere thanks and until I see you again,

you all have my very best and warmest wishes.

Paul Maillet

Your Ottawa Orleans Green Party candidate

Paul Maillet – Green Party of Canada – Riding Ottawa Orleans

Your Background: This is the second time I have run as a green party candidate in this riding.  I have lived in Orleans for over 17 years.  I am a retired military
Colonel with 33 years experience as an Air Force aerospace engineer and was the Director of Defence Ethics after the tragic Somalia affair.  Since 2001, I have developed a successful consultancy in ethics and governance relating to controlling wrongdoing and building integrity in Canadian federal government departments, aboriginal communities and international projects.  This election is about contempt for democracy, and I have considerable experience in
controlling corruption in government.

What are your reasons for running? The reason for this election is the ethical misconduct of the government.  I bring over 13 years experience in the field
of government ethics and feel I can be a strong and uncompromising voice on this issue.  If we can get the ethics right then all other issues become easy.

What are your riding’s biggest needs? Orleans is about 35,000 households and the business of Orleans is families.  We generally live in Orleans and work
elsewhere.  The local issues are improving transit, bringing jobs into the community and the quality of life of our residents.  We will be a strong voice for Orleans.

However, the community is concerned with both national and global issues and the place of Canada.  The government fell due to unethical behavior and people want honest government.  If we get the ethics right, all else will be dealt with fairly. I will work every day for accountability and towards a new politics of cooperation, compromise, courtesy and collaboration.

Canada has suffered a massive blow to its  reputation for peace, human rights and the environment.  I will work to rebuild our leadership and international
reputation for peace and human values. We were one of the last countries to approve the UN declaration of Indigenous rights, and then not take it seriously.  The loss of the Security Council seat is a massive international statement of the lack of trust the global community now has of us. We are criticized for obstructing global environmental initiatives. This is unbelievable and not who we are as Canadians.

Why should voters vote for you?   I have the experience to be a strong voice for the local, national and international concerns we have in Orleans.  I am a long
time resident here and we are blessed with a wonderful community and a great place to raise families and I will work to make it even better.  My background in ethics in government is uniquely situated to deal with the corrosive and disrespectful climate of contempt and obstruction that currently exists in parliament.  My international experience will make Orleans a strong voice and contributor to the relief of suffering and reduction of conflict in the Mideast.

What brought about your reason for running in the upcoming election? My experience in government, my belief in strong values, the care for others above all and my belief that I can make a real difference for the better, led me to run in this election for the second time.  I am deeply concerned that democracy is at risk in Canada.

Tell our readers one thing they would be surprised to know about you: I enjoy the arts, and for over twenty years, am a visual artist, painting in acrylics.  I was a former Chairman of the Board of the Gloucester Arts Council, and former member of Arteast.  I won first prize in acrylics/oils in the Gloucester 10^th Juried Art and Photo Exhibition in 1991.

I believe that the basic foundation of good government is public trust and confidence, and is built on strong and uncompromising values.  This is sadly
lacking in the present government.  Political values and behavior in Canada has degenerated to the point where Canadians are fed up and are disengaging just when it is most important that they be involved.   Ethics is an emerging word in the politics of Canada and in the expectations of voters.  Ethics is about right and wrong and good human values”.

We were once a country highly respected for our commitment to human rights in Canada and around the world.  This respect is gone. The ethical lapses of this government are sickening.  Amnesty International has just released a report in March 2011 which is a scathing indictment of Canada’s human rights performance and agenda, both domestically and internationally.  This is not a reputation that Canadians want.  Politics in Canada must change.

The ethical lapses are beyond belief.  Obstructing parliament is wrong. The refusal to provide parliament with F-35 and crime costs is wrong.  Avoiding accountability for torture of detainees in Afghanistan is wrong. The related character assignation of former Ambassador Colvin was wrong.  The refusal to repatriate Omar Khadr from Guantanamo was wrong. The unbelievable opposition to the UN Declaration of Indigenous rights was wrong.   Proroguing parliament for the last election was wrong. Canada is heavily criticized for obstructing global environmental initiatives. This is unbelievable.  This must change! The loss of the recent Security Council seat is a massive international statement of the lack of trust the global community has of Canada.  This must change! Investigations into Conservative election campaign spending.  The G20 fiasco. The census issue. The list is endless.  We have not seen the last of contempt charges if politicians do not change their values and behavior.

This 41^st Election is a call for accountability.  It is time for change.  The ballot box is where it matters and where Canadians can hold the government accountable.  The ballot box is where you can elect strong voices for values and ethics to parliament. We need the voices of a new politics, a politics of cooperation,
compromise, courtesy and collaboration.  We need voices that put people first.   I commit to being be a strong voice for accountability and ethics if elected to parliament.   This is about  all Canadians  demanding a  new honest and responsible politics.

Welcome to the 2011 federal election . An election far too soon, and the result of the disgraceful conduct of the conservative party in parliament, and a parliament that does not understand that its role is to govern for all Canadians and not this culture of corrosive self interest.

Canadians have had enough.

Canadians are waking up to the reality that big change is needed.

I will be campaigning in this election on a platform of:

· A sustainable community for Orleans

· Responsible and honest government

· Rebuilding our international reputation for peace and human values

It is time for accountability. In this election I intend to engage in dialogue on:

What a sustainable community means to us. To quote Margret Wheatley “There is no power greater for change greater than a community discovering what it cares about”.  This is about how we can work together for a transit system that meets our needs, for local jobs, for the wellbeing of families.

What a responsible government means to us. It means above all ethics and integrity and accountability. It means respect for democracy. It means a new politics of cooperation, compromise, courtesy and collaboration.   It means building an economy that has a future. Why were we one of the last countries to approve the UN declaration of Indigenous rights, and then to marginalize it?  This is about respect for First Nations and Canadians.

What our international reputation for peace means to us. We need to regain our reputation for leadership and taking our place in the international community in a way that we can be proud. The massive erosion of our reputation as good international citizens is disgraceful. What are we doing in Libya and Afghanistan? Are we doing the right things? The loss of the Security Council seat is a massive international statement of the lack of trust the global community now has of us. We are criticized for obstructing global environmental initiatives. This is unbelievable and not who we are as Canadians.

We believe that if parliament can get the ethics right, then all other issues have a great chance of being dealt with fairly andrespectful of the highest human values.  My goal is to meet people and listen and engage the hard questions. I will engage heavily through my social media accounts on Facebook, Twitter, YouTube . All of these will be are accessible through my website.

I look forward to meeting you on the campaign. Please don’t hesitate to contact me any time.

Sincerely,

Paul

Email: pmaillet@magma.ca
Tel: 613.841.9216 Cell: 613.866.2503
Twitter @PaulMaillet

So what is an honest and helpful response from Canada on this?  From the global community, Canada, and its political parties?  So easy to jump right in and be righteous, and be politically opportunistic, side with the reform elements, and demand that leaders MUST GO NOW!  I would ask “why now” to publically hold such a position?  If we are in opposition to such governments, perhaps it would have been more honest to have a list of leaders who must go, and work to that end, and many, many undemocratic and oppressive regimes would be on the list.

If we believe in human rights, non-violence and peace, then perhaps our position should be constructive and helpful, and not reflexively take the side of one faction or another.  It should be solidly pro-peace, pro-democracy, pro-human rights and pro-non-violence.  Then the question is how to help the parties involved resolve differences in a way that respects such human values.  What does being in the “business of peace’ mean in such conflict?  Our initial response must be to stand strong in support of values and not necessarily factions. Then we must walk the talk.

We can stand and join the popular chorus or we can do something. Canadians like to think of themselves for being well respected for doing something constructive in conflict zones.  So by way of considering some general principles for action, perhaps we should define our support and voice in terms of standing for values and then:  first, offer to assist in  stopping or preventing violence or killing as a first priority, second, offer to assist in the care for the victims, third, offer to facilitate and create safe spaces for transition talks or diplomacy, fourth, offer to assist in strengthening or rebuilding governance where needed, fifth,  offer to assist in development of safe, healthy and socially responsible communities, sixth, offer to assist in reconstruction of economies and infrastructure and seventh, offer to assist to help the country enable truth, reconciliation and justice activity.

If this is clear to these countries in crisis, they can choose where they need help, and perhaps we will be well on the way to making some great new friends, and making a difference in this world.

Paul Maillet

 Perhaps it is time to face and correct the mistakes we made at the very beginning of all this.  It was so easy to respond to 911 with “war” and all the heavy weapons, death, collateral damage, fear and terrorist labels at our command.  It created an “enemy” which proceeded to justify itself in terms of fighting a war, and so attract recruits and money.  This is the power of language and the paths it takes us down.

  If we had responded in the language of criminality, courts and tribunals, invoking international law and policing, using all the investigative and arrest methods of INTERPOL and global police forces to pursue and apprehend such criminals and deal with drug operations, the whole tragic story may have been much different.  An international coalition of police forces already exists and cooperation would have light years easier than the path we went down. This is not to say that military forces would not be necessary from time to time, but in support of police forces to affect arrests or deal with large concentrations of such criminals. Think of the civilians that would be alive today.

 So Canada is again at a crossroads.  Perhaps we would make a better contribution in training police forces, strengthening governance, down to the municipal levels, so that the Afghans make a real difference themselves in their villages, rather than creating a huge arm of national political power that may be harder to control.  The war is not militarily winnable.  This is a fact.  Perhaps it is winnable locally, through policing, one village at a time, and globally through a consensus of international law and justice.  We have an opportunity here for the kind of real leadership that Canadians expect of their government.

 Paul Maillet, Colonel retired. Former DND Director of Defence Ethics

So where is the hope for these communities?  More enforcement?  Perhaps, if possible.   But perhaps it is also time to reflect on different possibilities regarding the “ethic of care”, in finding options for doing what the community can do for itself.    Something possible is a “direction, engagement and results” initiative, where what is important is first finding a direction that has hope for the future.  Given a common awareness of this, of our values, and our future, the next question is that of engagement possibilities and building the future one result at a time.  The most significant engagement possibility is in reconnecting the community, through reconnecting the youth with the main community and with the elders.  In a commitment to accompaniment with our youth and our elders, with ourselves, in a more inclusive community.   It is time to sit and talk and get to know each other, to share our stories, and learn from each other. It is time to build a new shared identity.  There is an adage “I am who you are”, which means “when you suffer, I suffer”.  We need to be one family in this community, where our moral worth is measured in how we treat the most disadvantaged among us.

 We are a community that does not look the other way regarding any of our youth or our elders. It is time to do what we can do, one smile, one quiet word, one helping hand, one non-judgmental conversation at a time.