To Sing or Not to Sing: But is That the Question?

A school principal in Springfield, New Brunswick (too bad his name isn’t Skinner) is making international headlines today and has sparked a national debate over the singing of O Canada in schools across the country.

Erik Millett, principal of Belleisle elementary school, is on the defence today as a decision he made over a year ago to do away with the daily sing-along has caused quite the flag-flap, and not just in Canada. Media outlets in both the U.S and in Europe have picked up this story, but why such a to-do over a daily tradition that is seen by many as un-necessary and outdated?

Ultimately it comes down to how you handle a situation, and Mr. Millett has provided us a Class A example of how not to make a statement. His response to the whole situation involved of a variety of different responses, not entirely consistent which each other.
Mr. Millett says that in 2007 a “couple of parents” had voiced their concern about the singing of the anthem and that: “We try to balance the needs of every student, and we want every student to feel welcome in our school.” Mr. Millett has also suggested that the song is “distracting” to students (could someone please explain that to me?) and that it takes too much time out of morning classes. Mr. Millett also went on to say that the playing of O Canada through a low quality PA system doesn’t do it justice and that the song loses its meaning when heard everyday. He also added by reserving the playing of O Canada for events such as assemblies helps to preserve its meaning.

At the risk of sounding irreverent and unpatriotic, I would suggest that the issue of singing the national anthem daily is not front and centre here. I can remember hearing O Canada at school played through the PA system and can’t say it was the most patriotic feeling in the world. The fumbling of cassette tapes, the clicking of the microphone on and off and the occasional “Due to technical difficulties there will be no O Canada today.” You knew when you heard this someone had forgotten to rewind the tape or someone had lost it altogether. But in a lot of ways it is not the a question of whether or not the song should be sung at schools every morning but instead about a personal agenda expressed inapproprietly. Mr. Millett claims he did away with the anthem singing because of the complaints of a couple of parents; complaints which he refuses the elaborate on; but what about the hundreds of students and parents who didn’t complain? Who are these parents to make them so powerful? For myself it doesn’t really add up. Ultimately it comes down Mr. Millett’s own values and beliefs. I’m sure he wouldn’t have been so quick to listen to these parents if he didn’t himself have some qualms with the anthem himself.

In actuality Mr. Millett did nothing wrong in doing away with the morning tradition. The law says it is up to each school’s principal to decide if O Canada will be played or not. The big to-do has to do with his motivation and the lingering sense that what he is saying is not completely the truth. If he had come out and had a story and stuck to it he might have saved him face, but his dithering on the issue and conflicting stories have left him looking more like a politician. (which he coincidently is as Mr. Millett has previously run for the Green Party)

Whether the national anthem should be sung or not (many countries, like Sweden for example, would think this practice unusual and over-patriotic) it now seems that Millett has more to worry about than “a couple of parents.” Is this negative press justified? Probably not; but one can’t help but think Mr.Millett brought it on himself.

Will Grassby

Check out http://www.cbc.ca/canada/new-brunswick/story/2009/01/28/nb-o-canada.html?ref=rss for the full story.

The Fear of Learning

If there is one place that a child should feel safe it is at school. Education is invaluable and every child should without any question be able to learn in a safe environment.

Why is it then that in the past week two there have been stories of death and violence involving innocent children in and on their way to school?

From last week’s school collapse in Haiti to this week’s violent attack involving the spraying of acid at a group of Afghani girls and teachers on their way to school in Kandahar, it is children who are taking the fall for the problems of others.

The attack in Kandahar is however more than just an attack on children. This was an attack organized by a cowardly group of men trying to prevent young women from going to school. These people can hide behind whatever religious or ideological guise they want but all they in actuality stand for is sexist misogyny.

The two questions that arise out of this are obviously: why are women mistreated in Afghanistan and secondly, and more importantly, what can be done?

The why is unfortunately the easier question to answer. Violent acts are always rooted in fear and the truth is that these men are clearly afraid of women. The scary part of this is that these attacks are far more systematic than they might appear from the outside. This was not a random act of violence but rather part of an orchestrated attempt to scare girls away from education. The sad part is that it seems to be working. According to reports out of Kandahar today the attacks have achieved their goal of frightening girls out of attending school. But why do groups like the Taliban not want these girls going to school?

Once again the answer is fear. The key to control over a group of people has always been to keep them uneducated. Educated women would no doubt learn new words like equality and women’s-rights. If women in Afghanistan ever learned these things they would understand that the Taliban’s Islamic costume is hiding a monster within.

In a way this event shows how far Afghanistan has come since the fall of the Taliban from power. These girls were, despite the violent act, on their way to school; a place they wouldn’t even come close to when the Taliban were in charge. When they were the status quo the Taliban were able to conceal their true character but since being ousted from power the Taliban have been reduced to their true essence. They are revealed through this act for what they really are; terrorists. This is beyond doubt an act of terrorism where the goal is to force people into an action through violence. So how is this stopped? Girls have been scared into staying home, so does this mean the terrorists win?

The way to stop terrorism is not to give in and give the terrorists what they want. Instead a way must be found to get these girls to school safely. There must be someone in Afghanistan that could do this; someone who’s primary interest is “fighting terror.”

Sound familiar?

Foreign troops from around the world are stationed in Afghanistan in the so called "war on terror", so where are they when blatant acts of terrorism like this one are taking place?

In a quote from Matthias Tomczak, the Australian convenor of the Support Association of the Women of Afghanistan (SAWA), he says that “one of the forces that actually are working against a solution are the foreign troops because they can't distinguish between Taliban and civilians and often hit civilians and people are afraid of them.”

The problem is clearly that the people who are supposedly fighting terrorism are equally terrifying as the terrorists. If the interest was truly in peace and eradicating the terrorists, protecting innocent civilians and denying terrorists from achieving their goals should be at the top of the list. Perhaps protecting these girls and making sure schools and the roads leading to them are safe would be a better, more peaceful solution for coalition troops than using the same violence and fear tactics used by the terrorists.

If these attacks were happening on American or Canadian soil, whatever necessary measures would be taken to assure the continued security and education of students. Why should Afghani students be treated any differently?




Will Grassby

A Broken Promise

The situation that is currently unfolding in Haiti (and when I say ‘currently unfolding’ I am referring to an ongoing phenomenon over the course of hundreds of years) is both sickening and unremitting. The collapse of the school La Promesse last week added to a string of events including four tropical storms that wiped out crops as well as the rising food prices that were the source of violence and a food crisis.

However according to Petionville's representative in Parliament Stephen Benoit the school that collapsed and killed 88 students and teachers in Petionville last week has apparently become nothing more than a symbol for the perpetual suffering that has become synonomous with “Haiti.”

In an interview yesterday Benoit referred to the school’s collapse as a “golden occasion to address this anarchic construction.”

Of course this event will draw attention to Haiti and the haze of corruption that hangs over the country but when did the death of innocent children become a symbol for moving forward? How will this event save Haiti where the inexorable violence of the past three centuries has not? (here is a link to an excellent article that chronicles a part of Haiti’s violent past: http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1295/is_n5_v57/ai_13705082)

The sad truth is that the more than 2 million people in Haiti living in abject poverty have no reason to believe this event will spark anything more than a couple more days of headlines in developed nations before something more important to them takes over again.

What makes this story even more dispiriting is that the school “La Promesse”, which translates to ‘The Promise’ in English, was a school that was supposed to be a source of hope for many Haitians and their children. Families laboured and saved in order to pay the annual $1500 tuition fee to send their children to school and give them a chance in a country where almost half the population is illiterate.

Try to imagine for a minute living in a place with nothing and without any hope for the future but for your children to go and have a chance for something better.

Imagine saving every penny you had for years to send them to a place where they would get this chance.

Then picture this hope, this “promise” collapsing in front of your eyes. The place that you had spent your whole life working to send your child to becomes their grave.

After all of that try and picture reading in the paper that your representative in parliament called this event “a golden occasion” for the future of Haiti.
The death of those children does not symbolize any sort of opportunity for the future of Haitians. If anything the collapse of La Promesse symbolizes the loss of those who provided Haiti with a dream for the future.

This is a desperate situation but I am not trying to paint a demoralizing picture. Hope is important and trying to find positives, although very difficult, is absolutely necessary in the process of alleviating the destitution in Haiti. I just don’t think trying to use the deaths of innocent children as a positive is constructive, especially for those families grieving the loss of their beloved.

Will Grassby