Premier quashes Anti-Bullying Legislation Bill

On March 24th of this year the Opposition introduced a much needed addition to the current Educational Act of New Brunswick. The Anti-Bullying additions to the act takes our outdated look at Bullying into modern philosophy. This showing a no tolerance view point to children seeking an education where they feel intimidated to go to school and has been brought up for years by parents.

On a personal note one of the ladies that worked on my campaign when I first started brought up about her own daughter. How she would be attacked at school by other children and endure nasty name calling and aggression to the point of almost removing her from the system. I at first pointed her to the fact that their was amendments being placed in when I noticed there was a bill before the legislature. Under the act things like this are addressed that this little girl endured. They include teasing, social exclusion, threats, intimidation, stalking, physical violence, theft, sexual or racial harassment, public humiliation, or destruction of property. Other such additions included “harassment” means any threatening, insulting, or dehumanizing gesture, use of data or computer software, or written, verbal, or physical conduct directed against a pupil or school personnel that:

(a) places a pupil or school personnel in reasonable fear of harm to his or her person or damage to his or her property,

(b) has the effect of substantially interfering with a pupil's educational performance, opportunities, or benefits, or

(c) has the effect of substantially disrupting the orderly operation of a school;

Bill 52 died on the floor at the hands of the Liberal Party the following day when second read was to occur. No debates no amendments just death to a bill that could of made a safe learning environment for children. Under the current section 24 of the Educational Act of New Brunswick the addition to include for suspension of pupils would include for bullying. The most important part of this Bill was creating proactive approach to Bullying.The Change to section 24.1(3) A principal shall in addition to a suspension under subsection (1) require one, some or all of the parties involved to participate in educational programs highlighting the negative consequences associated with bullying and harassment.

A part of the devils advocate that is not shown or amendments put forward are what happens in situations where has the effect of substantially disrupting the orderly operation of a school. This portion needs direct cause and effect linked to it. If a child has a condition such as Autism or other known psychological conditions there will need to be special inclusions put in place. So maybe having Section 24.1(3a) in place reading " In cases where special needs children are placed in classrooms and have known conditions then disruptiveness must be addressed by other means than suspensions. We still need to accommodate children that do fall outside of the norm of what we deem " Disruptive Children". There also needs an amendment 21.4(3b) when any form of the Anti-Bullying legislation is used as a means for revenge or abuse. Then it is punishable by suspension also up to and not exceeding 5 days. During the suspension a sit down meeting with the children's parents, teachers and school principal to address why and proactive measures put in place.

If we are to curb bullying we must have policies that are looking at causes and curbing immediately. The legislative amendments are a great start but as in other parts of the country the initiative must also educate children on what it is and why it needs to stop. There are many courses available to parents and teachers so educators will have the ability to focus on education not policing.

The Harbour Bridge Fiasco

Once again we see some Liberal Politicking going on and this time they are using the citizens of Saint John as their Ginny Pigs. Ottawa is prepared to forgive the bridge's outstanding debt of $22.6 million and pay half of the $35 million refurbishment bill - $17.5 million. So for the last amount of years the citizens of Saint John have been on the hook for something used by the entire Province.It is the citizens of Saint John that use this bridge to get back and forth to work or get around the city. In other parts of the Province and I will use Grand Manan for instance where it is a provincially owned ferry service. The people that live in the area are given a lowered rate for usage then others that partake in visiting the nice Island in the middle of the Bay of Fundy. So now the graham government once again is playing politics if not why is Jack Keir involved, it is not his riding nor portfolio. So once again I say politicking using grand standing to take away from his attempt to get the Tax Payers of our Province to pay for their short comings.

So what is the fiscally responsible thing to do:

Presently we are in on of the worst if not the worst deficits in our provinces history. So if we completely remove the tolls then where does the money come from and why again should the people or business in the city be on the hook for the Liberals now grand standing as this had been in the news since last spring.

The first thing is to do is secure the federal funds and start the work. Stop playing Politics and get the bridge fixed before it is in such disrepair that it is unrepairable and then the people of Saint John are reduced to using the reversing Falls Bridge which is like a mountain bike trail on its best of days.

The next thing is its a 22.5 million pay down off its debt. This is a true pay down with the interest no longer accruing and the only thing left is future repairs. So address that now in not a lump sum payment because we have already seen how the Liberals are such great money managers of our Province. Remember your MOU and CPI?

The next thing as mentioned above is how to address future repairs. This is an older structure and will need to be maintained after September 27th and the Liberals are sent to pasture. So why not set up a now Federal-Provincial cost sharing as they are proposing in this deal. I know why they do not want to do it because it makes fiscal responsibility. They want the feds to give us a one time payment that will be squandered like the slush fund or like a kid with his first real paycheck. Once the bridge is turned over to the Provincial Government it falls on the tax payers to pay out of the Provincial coffers.

So now lets not forget the people of Saint John which since Keir was at one time one of the people of the Helm of the Bridge Authority leaves us the people that live and work here on the hook for tolls. The bridge authority still employs people so if we take off the tolls lost jobs. Bravo gentlemen create more unemployment for Saint John. So lets look at the smart way of doing things not just look for the normal Liberal quick fix or so they have an influx of cash to pay down the debt they created.

The tolls are a necessity for a structure like this but why should the people that live and work here be always put on the hook. So since the introduction of the B-Pass which is a one time $30 fee to acquire. So the people that reside here pay the one time fee once a year. Then there is still a once a year automatic cash flow into the provincial coffers for the bridge. If you show you work or live within the city of Saint John or its boundaries then you have this offer to you. Same thing as if you went to renew your drivers licence. So the cost is adding a line item to a sheet.

Commercial clients that have established businesses in the city of Saint John as it is today would also require the use of a commercial B-Pass at a higher but reasonable negotiated rate but takes into consideration that the more axles the more damage done to the infrastructure. This is the same thing as we do to licence vehicles in the Province but a once a year fee not a daily fee for usage. If businesses do not pay the fee then their B-Pass is revoked, this alone may stop some certain large corporations in our city from not paying their bills on time.

This way we still have a cash influx for repairs but no longer putting it on the backs of the people that live here. It also promotes for businesses to stop building outside of the city limits. The other key feature it does is still slows down traffic entering into the bridge but also speeds up the traffic going through as B-Pass lanes and will keep traffic flows constantly moving at a good pace. This seems to be where the Harbour bridge bottle necks always occur.

People traveling or from outside the Saint John area are then given a reduced rate back to the quarter again for domestic vehicles. This also puts pressure on the local government and provincial government to increase tourism so we are one attracting monies to the Harbour Bridge and to Saint John.

I just hope once again the Liberals don't blow this one or put it as another thing on the tax payers of Saint John or New Brunswick to fix their mistakes.

Edward Hoyt

Independent Fundy River Valley