Monthly Archives: May 2021

The federal government is expected to announce this week whether it will take over the environmental assessment processes for two controversial Ford government highway projects.

The planned Highway 413 and the Bradford Bypass would loop around the outer reaches of the Greater Toronto Area, cutting through portions of the ecologically sensitive Greenbelt. The federal governments decision could have major implications for the future of both projects, which the Ontario government has sought to fast-track amid increasing backlash.

In February, a coalition of environmental groups asked Ottawa to step in, citing impacts on the environment from the construction and the increased emissions from traffic on the highways. Federal Environment Minister Jonathan Wilkinson is required to respond by Tuesday with a decision, which many believe has the potential to kill one or both of the projects.

Our award-winning journalists bring you the news that impacts you, Canada, and the world. Don't miss out.

The federal regime is more rigorous than the provincial one, said Laura Bowman of Ecojustice, one of the environmental groups who wrote to Wilkinson. Not only does it take longer, she added, such a review can also uncover environmental issues that make it difficult for a project to go ahead.

It really is a more transparent process that ensures issues cant simply be glossed over, she said.

I think the question is really whether these projects could withstand the scrutiny of a federal (assessment) and whether the province is willing to do the work to get them to a place where they could withstand that scrutiny.

If built, the 413 also known as the GTA West Corridor would carve a 60-kilometre route from Highway 401 near Milton to Highway 400 north of Vaughan. Along the way, it would cut through 2,000 acres of farmland, cross 85 waterways, pave nearly 400 acres of protected Greenbelt land, disrupt 220 wetlands and carve through the habitats of 10 species-at-risk.

Earlier this month, a National Observer/Torstar investigation found that eight of Ontarios most powerful land developers own thousands of acres of prime real estate along the planned route of the 413. The investigation also delved into ties between the developers and Doug Fords Progressive Conservatives, who revived the project after it was shelved by the previous Liberal government.

In recent months, municipalities along the route have either turned their backs on the project or backed the request for a federal environmental assessment.

Though a previous study found the 413 would save drivers less than a minute on average, the Ontario Ministry of Transportation has said it could shave half an hour off the length of the route. It has also said the project is necessary to accommodate all the drivers expected to be on GTA roads in the coming decades, and is seeking to streamline its assessment process.

There is a strong case for moving forward with Highway 413, Ontario Transportation Minister Caroline Mulroney said earlier this week.

The Ontario Liberals, NDP and Greens have said they would cancel the project if elected.

The Bradford Bypass is a shorter route, drawing a 16-kilometre path across York and Simcoe counties to connect Highway 400 with Highway 404 to the east. Like the 413, it would run through ecologically-sensitive land: the proposed route of the bypass would cross the Holland Marsh, an area of wetlands and fertile soil thats part of the Greenbelt.

Unlike the 413, the municipalities along the route of the bypass support the project. And opposition parties have stopped short of calling for it to be scrapped, instead saying the plan needs a full environmental assessment.

The bypass last received such a review in 1997, before policies aimed at protecting the Greenbelt existed in Ontario. That assessment also predicted the highway could cause severe water pollution, and did not examine the climate impacts of the project.

The Progressive Conservatives are working on studies to update their plans for the bypass, but have proposed to exempt it from the provincial environmental assessment process.

The Transportation Ministry has previously said the government is working to minimize impacts on the environment, and that the project would save drivers 35 minutes.

Continue reading here:

Will feds tinker with Ontario's highway plans? Stay tuned - National Observer

Officially, the war for Palestine, which ended with the establishment of the state of Israel and the exile of three-quarters of a million Palestinians, began on May 15, 1948, with the termination of the British Mandate, the declaration of Independence by Zionist leaders, and the formal start of hostilities between the fledgeling Jewish state and the countrys Palestinian population and Arab allies.

Others point to the United Nations Partition Resolution passed on November 29, 1947, and the war that commenced soon thereafter, as the actual beginning of the conflict. But an equally plausible argument can be made that the War for Palestine began more than a quarter-century earlier, on May Day, 1921 not in Jerusalem but in a mixed neighbourhood along the sea between Jaffa and Tel Aviv.

It was on that May 1 that a group of Jewish Marxists loudly marched into the Palestinian area of the neighbourhood of Manshiyyeh after clashing with more moderate Labor Zionists. With flags waving and chanting loudly for workers solidarity, their march was met by warning shots by the British gendarmes hoping to disperse them. Unfortunately, the Arab residents did not understand their slogans; and fearing the gunfire signalled a Jewish attack on the neighbourhood, they attacked first, starting a riot that quickly moved down into Jaffa and killed 47 Jews and 48 Palestinians. Hundreds more were made homeless.

The violence shocked the British occupation regime which was still getting its footing four years after conquering Palestine, but it should not have. By 1921, Jaffas rapid economic and demographic growth had made it the undisputed cultural and economic capital of Arab Palestine, where according to British police officials you would get more information about political feeling than in any other part of Palestine. At the same time, Tel Aviv, which since its creation in 1909 as the first modern Jewish neighbourhood in Palestine had gone from Jaffas daughter to a powerful competitor, the cultural and economic capital of Jewish Palestine.

Indeed, Tel Avivs encroachment on land belonging to Jaffa and the surrounding agricultural villages was already worrying enough for its last Ottoman governor, Hassan Bey, to build a mosque well north of Jaffas Old City in 1916 in an attempt to block Tel Avivs southward spread.

Jaffas Palestinian Arab population described the storm of violence in early May 1921 as a revolt or revolution (thawra, the same word used by protesters during the Arab Spring). For their part, Zionist officials admitted in their reports that it was a result of the unnatural expansion of the Jewish community, whose seizing and spreading over the rest of Jaffa and into the surrounding orchards was deemed a leading cause of the mountainous hatred between the two communities.

But rather than trying to mitigate the growing anger of the indigenous population, Zionist leaders pressed for unlimited immigration into Palestine, even as thousands of Jewish inhabitants of Jaffa migrated across the now official border to Tel Aviv, which was granted official recognition as a separate town 10 days after the eruption of violence.

In the next three decades, Jaffa and Tel Aviv would continue to clash, and occasionally cooperate, as the two cities and their respective national communities developed into full-fledged national rivals. The Palestinian Great Revolt of 1936 also began in Jaffa, while the Jewish bombardment of the city at the start of the 1948 war precipitated one of the largest exoduses of Palestinians into exile.

A century after May 1, 1921, the borderlands between Jaffa, now a relatively poor but endlessly gentrifying mixed neighbourhood of Tel Aviv, and the modern Jewish centre of the united municipality, remain a constant source of tension and even violence. Just as in Jerusalem and throughout the West Bank, secular and religious Jews alike take over Palestinian properties, push out the local population, and continue a self-described process of Judaisation (Yehudit in Hebrew, an official Israeli government term) that has occurred without rest now for 100 years.

Indeed, the dynamics of Jewish-Palestinian relations in Jaffa have always been a harbinger and microcosm of the broader Israeli-Palestinian conflict, putting the lie to long-made claims by Israel and its supporters of a firm difference in how Palestinians are treated on either side of the Green Line. In reality, most of the techniques deployed in the occupied territories after 1967 were first developed and perfected inside the sovereign 1948 borders of Israel.

In the mixed areas of cities like Jaffa, Haifa and Jerusalem, enough Palestinians remained so that their presence could not simply be erased and replaced by Jews and their number was manageable enough so that the demographic balance could be shifted with some effort.

Those who have paid attention to the constant struggle over territory, identity and political and economic power in Israel since 1948, and especially during the last five decades, have long understood that the territorially defined two-state solution championed by the Israeli peace camp, which was ostensibly at the heart of the Oslo land for peace formula, was doomed from the start. Israel had more than enough power and foreign support to retain permanent control over and continue to settle the occupied territories.

As the chances for peace became remote with the collapse of the Oslo process and the eruption of the Al-Aqsa Intifada in 2000, various groups of Palestinian, Israeli, and international scholars and policymakers came together to think about alternative methods of cohabitation on this deeply contested land. They developed or repurposed ideas ranging from a secular democratic state to various forms of federation, confederation and binationalism.

One of these suggestions was the idea of parallel states, first introduced in 2010 and detailed in our 2014 book One Land Two States: Israel and Palestine as Parallel States. The ideas outlined were the result of years of informal discussions between Israeli and Palestinian academics and experts, with the support of international colleagues.

The basic idea was to divide sovereignty rather than divide the land, and build a new kind of political architecture with two separate state structures both covering the whole territory, with freedom for people to move and to live in the whole area, thus preserving the notion of two separate states, while at the same time integrating the land into one geographic entity, with a common external border, and a common economic space.

Such a structure would enable Israel to satisfy its security imperatives through a continued presence in the West Bank while enabling Palestinians to return to all of historic Palestine, and both peoples to share Jerusalem as their capital. Crucially, wherever they lived, Israelis and Palestinians would remain citizens of their respective states, ending the demographic threat that for decades trumped promises of democracy on either side of the Green Line.

In 2012, a group of Israelis and Palestinians put forward a similar concept was under the rubric Two States, One Homeland (now known as A land for all), promoting a more traditional form of confederalism. Such initiatives have shown enough traction for the confederation to be a central theme at the just completed 2021 conference of J-street, the liberal Jewish counterpart of AIPAC.

With its century-long history of Palestinian-Jewish cohabitation however forced and imbalanced Jaffa could serve as a starting point for a shared and more equitable future. Instead, Jaffa continues to be treated more as a de facto Jewish settlement than a fully-fledged part of Tel Aviv, with land expropriation and militarised policing a continuous reality for its 20,000 Palestinian residents.

Looking back a century, Sami Abu Shehadeh, a lifelong Jaffan activist, Knesset member and chairman of the Balad Party, explained to us: Of course 1921 happened in Jaffa; it was the centre of Zionist as well as Palestinian life, so we could see what was on the horizon by then. But even a century later, with Jaffas Palestinians only 1 percent of Tel Avivs population, there is barely an attempt to treat us as equal citizens. Because of that, the youth today continue to see themselves as part of the Palestinian nation, even if their ID card is Israeli.

The 100th anniversary of the 1921 revolt reminds us how deeply rooted this conflict remains. But only a few years before the violence, Jewish and Palestinian leaders came together to help put street lights in Jaffa, formed an export society for the famed Jaffa Orange, and built a new boulevard in the heart of Jaffa to match the newly built, tree-lined Rothschild Boulevard in Tel Aviv. Cooperation and collaboration were possible then, and could be again in Jaffa, Tel Aviv and across this sacred but deeply scarred land.

But only if it is based on the kind of equality, mutual respect and recognition that are at the heart of the various post-territorial solutions that are finally being given the attention they deserve. With a seemingly insurmountable imbalance of power in its favour, Israel has little incentive to acknowledge, never mind support, such efforts. But as the events of May Day 1921 remind us, conflicts that seem manageable today can fester for a century without a solution, rendering pyrrhic even the greatest of victories.

The views expressed in this article are the authors own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeeras editorial stance.

Read the original here:

Why the events in Jaffa of May 1, 1921 are important today - Al Jazeera English

Someones peaceful protest is another persons terrorism, he says, contrasting the FBIs mobilization in response to the Black Lives Matter movement with the lack of preparedness ahead of the January 6 Capitol insurrection. Get em Prof! writes a student in the classs chat window.

When I lecture, Im not looking for likes, says Nteta. I want to challenge students to think about their world in order to improve it. In the United States, there is a lack of understanding of our history regarding race and politics and the consequences of that history. We should talk honestly about these issues. My small contribution to that is my classes. We have to be committed to this project of building the best democracy that we can. I hope my students recognize there is power in this goal and in mobilizing based on the values of our country.

For his impassioned teaching, his groundbreaking research, and his leadership of the UMass Poll, Nteta, a faculty member since 2007, was recently named a UMass Spotlight Scholar. It is highly unusual that an outstanding researcher is also a great teacher, but with Professor Nteta we are very fortunate to have someone who is excellent at both, says Jesse Rhodes, professor and chair of the UMass Amherst department of political science.

Nteta grew up in Middleton, Mass., with a keen appreciation of the power of politics to change people's lives. His father, Christopher Nteta, came to the US from South Africa in 1965 to attend Harvard Divinity School and taught history and African American studies at UMass Boston for 30 years. He was active in the Massachusetts anti-apartheid movement, including pressuring the Polaroid company to stop providing technology to the South African apartheid government. For many people politics are just a side show, but for others, politics are life and death, observes Nteta.

Ntetas wide-ranging research revolves around his conviction that race remains the defining issue of our time. W.E.B. Du Bois famously said that the problem of the 20th century was the problem of the color line, Nteta says. I think thats true as well for the 21st century. Will the US live up to our ideals of egalitarianism, equality, and liberty? Most people think these ideas connect, but they are often in conflict. Im interested in recognizing where we are as a country and as a society given the changes since the 1960s.

An optimist at his core, Nteta believes that the US is inching ever-closer to its egalitarian ideal. He asks, What is the impact on how the public thinks about issues of race and politics as the country shifts demographically and culturally to accept groups that have historically been outsiders? That type of change is revelatory in a country founded on notions of white, male supremacy.

As his colleague, Jane Fountain, distinguished university professor of political science and public policy, sees it: The work of Professor Tatishe Nteta provides foundational, rigorous research on the underlying dynamics of political attitudes, opinions, and associated political behavior in campaigns, elections, and democratic life.

A look at just a few of the papers published by Nteta and his coauthors in leading political journals in the last five years convey the scope of his work. They include: Understanding White Polarization in the 2016 Vote for President: The Sobering Role of Racism and Sexism. This research sheds light on the political success of Donald Trump. Nteta is currently building on this work to examine the 2020 election.

Another paper, For You Were Strangers in the Land of Egypt: Religious Elites, Public Opinion, and Immigration Reform in the United States, is part of Ntetas broader research into attitudes concerning immigration.

The publication Burying the Hatchet? Elite Influence and White Public Opinion on the Washington Redskins Controversy and other papers expand understanding of symbolic racism in sports.

In The First Daughter Effect: The Impact of Fathering First Daughters on Mens Preferences on Gender Equality Issues, Nteta has demonstrated that men who have a daughter as a first child express more liberal attitudes.

One of his Ntetas many ongoing projects with UMass colleagues involves utilizing big data to scour millions of court cases to uncover implicit racial bias by political elites. They plan to extend the search to Congressional records. We can look at centuries of data in terms of speeches and other rhetoric, Nteta says. Levels of implicit racial bias can be indicators of whether or not we are nearing the mountaintop spoken of by Martin Luther King.

In addition to teaching and research, Nteta serves as director of the UMass Poll, which administers four to six public opinion surveys annually. The poll is a leader in online polling and in asking questions in a bottom-up, open-ended manner. What also sets the UMass Poll apart, Nteta says, is that the operators of the poll are professors first, pollsters second. He says, We bring not just our academic experience, but our classroom experience to ask questions of importance to Massachusetts.

In all his work, Nteta focuses on his hopes for a more united and egalitarian America. He says, Theres more that brings us together than keeps us apart.

Findings from Tatishe Ntetas recent research, published with his UMass colleague Elizabeth Sharrow, associate professor of political science and history, and Melinda R. Tarsi 14PhD, of Bridgewater State University, in Race and Social Problems (2020).

Whats in a Name? Symbolic Racism, Public Opinion, and the Controversy over the NFLs Washington Football Team

According to Daniel Snyder, owner of the National Football League Team formerly known as the Washington Redskins, the name really means honor and respect. For decades, Snyder pointed to polls that suggest majoritarian support among the American public to justify the continued use of the racially contested team moniker. However, Indigenous activists and their allies have long argued that the term Redskins is a racial slur. . . Our findings indicated that support for the continued use of the teams name, though admittedly widespread among the American public, is in part influenced by negative racial attitudes directed at Native Americans. Rather than honoring American Indians, those supportive of Native American mascots and symbols in professional football are significantly likely to begrudge them.

Questions about the Spotlight Scholar faculty award program?

Contact Marzena Burnham

More here:

Spotlight Scholar | Research Next - UMass News and Media Relations

The seat became vacant when Conservative councillor Lee Wares resigned to move closer to his elderly parents.

The five candidates are Bruno De Oliveira (Labour), Charles Goodhand (UK Independence Party), Madelaine Hunter-Taylor (Liberal Democrat), Anne Meadows (Conservative) and Eliza Wyatt (Green). Each candidate was sent questions which were submitted by community groups and voters. Here we focus on two questions: why do you want to be a councillor in the Patcham ward and what will you bring to the role.

Lib Dem candidate Madelaine Hunter-Taylor said: "Standing as a candidate in Patcham is an exciting opportunity to work closely with the community and advocate for issues that are important to residents.

"I am a proud Brightonian, a parent to three teenagers who attend the local high school and run a community interest company highlighting the impact of domestic abuse.

"Over the past few years, Ive watched funding cuts deeply impact our communities, and that is not acceptable alongside the challenges of the past year.

"I believe its important to work together to create a community that feels safe and supported alongside doing my best to shape a city that residents are proud to call their home.

"I will bring a fresh perspective to ongoing issues and a motivation to overcome any barriers we face.

"I have a determination to challenge long-standing issues that others are failing to resolve.

"In my professional (and sometimes my personal) life, Im faced with constant problem-solving, engage with lots of different people and work towards solutions to very complex issues.

Im not afraid of big challenges.

"I want to bring an approachable, relatable face to local politics and ensure the local council and democracy is understood and accessible to all residents.

"The Liberal Democrats are dedicated to supporting Patcham over the coming years and are looking forward to getting to know its residents."

Labour candidate Bruno De Oliveira said: "My first ever volunteering opportunity was at All Saints Church in Patcham working with young people from local schools.

"When volunteering with St John Ambulance, in Hollingbury, one aspect that concerned me was the lack of funding and other support for community organisations such as the Old Boat Corner Community Centre.

"I want to make a difference and be involved in shaping the future of Hollingbury and Patcham.

"For too long, the ward has been seen as one of the poorer relatives of the city, and it needs the voice of a strong, local community-minded councillor who will get things done.

"Im a community psychologist who has contributed to the United Nations and the British Medical Journal.

"Ive successfully brought local communities wellbeing to the forefront of regional and national debate and I am a community mental health practitioner and Protect the NHS campaigner."

Conservative candidate Anne Meadows said: "I have lived in Patcham for over 20 years, work for the NHS and my children went to the local schools.

"I live near Horsdean Recreation Ground, land which the Greens and Labour wish to develop but where I support the 1,600 residents who wish to save this land from development.

"I want to ensure residents in Patcham and Hollingbury have a voice in the city which reflects their needs, a voice which is different from those in the centre of the city a nuance not understood by the current administration.

"I have extensive experience, having been a councillor previously, so I am familiar with the challenges both residents and councillors face.

"I was on the Housing Committee, so I know the work that needs to be done to raise the quality of our own stock, build new homes where appropriate and also tackle homelessness in the city.

"The Greens and Labour recently voted for the Homeless Bill of Rights, which encourages tents to be set up on the streets and in open spaces.

"This puts the council at odds with the police, whom residents would expect to uphold the law."

Green candidate Eliza Wyatt said: "I was born and raised in Patcham and have witnessed the growth of the surrounding area.

"I care deeply about protecting nature and the environment for our children I have been Green for as long as I can remember and an issue close to my heart, saving the NHS.

"I am in favour of providing good housing for diverse income groups but Im also keen on protecting Patcham from simply becoming a rat run for the town of Brighton and preserving existing parks and gardens.

"Ive got deep local roots as a child I went to school in Patcham.

"Ive previously stood up for the preservation of Patcham old village against bullying contractors.

"Im proud to be part of a successful Green Party team thats making our city a better place to be.

"I want to help them help Brighton citizens continue to improve the quality of their life in Brighton."

Postal voting has now closed but residents in the Patcham ward with a polling card can vote at the polling station listed on Thursday between 7am and 10pm. The votes will be counted on Friday, May 7.

Follow the Brighton and Hove Independent on Facebook for the latest updates.

Go here to see the original:

Patcham by-election: What the candidates will bring to the role if they are elected - Brighton & Hove Independent