The Ultimate Checkout

In just a couple of days, on May 2nd, Canadians will be going to the polls for the next General Election and deciding who will represent them in Parliament. Unfortunately, in the last election in October 2008, only 59% of us showed up to cast ballots. Now that's a D grade in turnout! Why is it that given the opportunity so many of us don't show up to vote? And what would happen if we all did?

We are lucky enough to live in a system that allows us to elect the people who represent us in government. Ideally, that means we chose people who share the same values and have the same opinions as us, at least on the main issues. When people don't vote, they often claim it's because they feel disconnected from politics and feel that no one truly represents them. But I would argue that the main political parties have such a diverse spread of opinions on issues including law and order, immigration, and government programs, that most people fit more closely with one party's agenda over the others. And I would argue that most people have an opinion on these main issues. (Check out Vote Compass, if you haven't already, for a self-administered test to see which party's views align most closely with yours.)

The real problem is getting people, especially young people, involved in, and excited about, the political process. According to Elections Canada, only about 37% of voters aged 18 to 24 turned up at the polls in 2008. And studies show that if you don't start young, you may never vote at all. The key to a higher turnout must be, as it is with many things, to start really really young, and introduce our electoral system to children in elementary school. Children have an uncanny ability to get excited about anything at all, so if we can convince them that politics is not only important, but also fun, they'll be waiting in anticipation for their first opportunity to vote. (I stumbled upon a treasure chest of resources for BC educators here.)

Something unique that's happening this time around: we are seeing an unprecedented number of young people involved online politically through various social media sites, the biggest one being Facebook, of course. Although, Facebook was around in 2008, it has grown significantly since then, both in the number of users and also in the number of ways we use the site in our everyday lives. Social bookmarking tools have made it easy to share links with friends, and thanks to this unique interconnectivity, sites like www.shitharperdid.ca and www.projectdemocracy.ca, have gone viral within a matter of days, sometime hours.

The type of content that draws the attention of young (potential) voters tends to be blunt, speaks to them directly, and does not undermine their power. It does the opposite: it reminds them of how important they are (see Rick Mercer's rant and news stories covering the University of Guelph advance polling incident). I hope that this unprecedented direct call to young voters encourages more of them to show up to cast their votes.

When I was studying in Ghent, Belgium, in 2007, there was a general election. My housemates, all students, were reading up on the candidates and rearranging their schedules to make sure they got to the polls on election day; they took their voting seriously. It turns out that in Belgium, like in ancient Athens, a system of compulsary voting is in place. In fact, there are about 30 countries in the world that require their citizens to vote, and penalties for not going to the polls range from fines to community service. In Rio, for example, you need to show proof of having voted in order to collect certain social services. In Belgium, if you fail to vote in four elections, you may lose your right to vote (Compulsory Voting Around the World - The Guardian).

The main benefit of compulsory voting, of course, is that it gets more people to vote! And that means that election results are more representative of the population's views. There are other benefits, though. For example, compulsory voting can make it hard for fringe parties to gain momentum simply by rallying their voter base. As well, compulsory voting has the effect of getting people involved in the political process, and an engaged public is less likely to feel disheartened or powerless.

Although you won't be penalized for not voting in the Canadian election in the ways described above, isn't having a leader that less than half the country supports punishment enough? So I am asking you to make it your civil duty to vote on May 2nd! And please get involved. More information about who your candidates are and where to vote is available at www.vote.ca.

Stephen Harper Hair

B, my partner in life, has recently started sporting what he himself has coined 'Stephen Harper hair.' For a little while now, he's been subjected to my random rants about the evils of the cosmetic industry and warnings about the carcinogenic ingredients in his soap, shampoo and fancy pomade. But it wasn't until recently, when baby M started pulling at his hair (nose and glasses) that he became genuinely concerned about parabens. Enough to suddenly stop using his fancy pomade and go au naturel.

So why are there parabens in our soaps, shampoos and styling products? And what's Health Canada doing about it?

Parabens are synthetic preservatives that have been used in the cosmetic and food industries for many years. They are effective at preventing the growth of bacteria and fungi in all types of products. In 2004, a paper published in the Journal of Applied Toxicology concluded that parabens can accumulate in the body, mimic estrogen, and have been found in breast tumours. This research raised concerns about the long term effetcs of low-dose exposure to these substances, and precipitated additional research on the safety of their inclusion in our cosmetic and food products.

Somehow, the Scientific Committee on Consumer Products (SCCP) in Europe came to a different conclusion about parabens than both Health Canada and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). A 2005 SCCP report states that more data is required to determine if certain types of parabens can be safely used in cosmetic products, even at low concentrations. The main concern is with parabens' ability to mimic estrogen, effectively binding to estrogen receptors and activating genes. There is currently a limit of concentrations up to 0.4% in the EU.

Health Canada and the FDA share the same opinion: that the concentrations of parabens usually present in cosmetics do not cause a health risk to consumers. There are currently no restrictions in place on the use of parabens in Canada, and they do not appear on the Cosmetic Ingredient Hotlist. In fact, there is no mention of parabens' use in cosmetics on the Health Canada website at all. What I did find online is a Health Canada letter to Mr. Praznik of the Canadian Cosmetic Toiletry and Fragrance Association (CCTFA), a response to his letter asking for clarification on Canada's stance on substances identified by the David Suzuki Foundation as the "Dirty Dozen." Although the CCTFA concludes in a holding statement that, "In the Canadian regulatory system, Health and Environment Canada will ultimately be the respective final arbitrators in protecting Canadians," I am not convinced that Health Canada is acknowledging, and therefore legitimizing, Canadians' concerns about parabens.

The marketplace has been quicker to respond to consumers, perhaps because they have more to gain if they do. And fortunately for B, the selection of paraben-free beauty products on drugstore and grocery store shelves is getting bigger and better. The challenge for us as consumers is to differentiate between marketing and facts, because, unfortunately, sometimes appearing to care is as profitable as actually caring. More work for us. Thanks, Health Canada!

And for the record, neither Harper's hair, nor his politics, are attractive.