Liberal Andy Hladyshevsky stresses life-long learning

Part of a series of Q&As with the candidates for Member of Parliament in Edmonton-Strathcona in the upcoming election

Jake Troughton

Andy Hladyshevsky, a lawyer who received a BSc, LLB and MBA from the University of Alberta, is running as the Liberal Party candidate in Edmonton Strathcona.

What do you consider the three most important issues in this campaign?

The most important one is potentiating human beings so they can be the best they can be. What does that mean? In this part of the riding, where you have a University, it means allowing people to have access to higher education, and allowing them to become the kind of human beings that can maximize their own potential. That sounds very high and noble, but from an educational point of view, it means affordable education—for the entire constituency, not just university students. What it means for me is for those 0–6 kids who live in low-income families get early learning and child care so they can come into an education system that’s publicly funded, that they get the proper nutrition and developmental attention that they need. ... It means lobbying and working hard with the provincial government in reducing the costs of school, and when the provincial government won’t, stepping in as a federal government and doing what we can to make access to education more affordable, and when we’re done, allowing life-long learning to occur, and allowing people to have access to additional enrichment opportunities. So that issue of potentiating the human being is providing education from zero to grave, which is seldom addressed in the provincial sphere. The second thing is ensuring that people who can’t vote for me are totally represented by me—the 0–6, the homeless, the people who are unemployed, the people who are mentally ill, seniors who have difficulty making ends meet—and making sure the federal government does whatever it can to make sure those folks get through their daily lives to become whatever they’re going to become. The third plank is creating the circumstances within what I call the business and human environment for that to happen. That means harnessing the human capital that you’ve created in the first two instances, innovating in science, research and technology—to deal with disease and other issues, but also to create the jobs in the new economy that need to be there. This is where things like [the National Institute for Nanotechnology] and the Alberta Heart Institute flow in; becoming the best of the best, not only in Alberta, but in the world, and allowing our people to come into that new economy and become leaders. Then not only have I done that in Edmonton Strathcona, but folks here are doing that and helping people elsewhere. That’s a very broad statement, but that’s what a candidate has to have a passion about, or don’t become a federal candidate.

While postsecondary education is primarily a provincial responsibility, the federal government has long had a role as well. What do you think Ottawa's role should be in this area?

This is actually quite a personal question to me. I’m from the Law class of 1979, and [Alberta Advanced Education Minister] Dave Hancock was a classmate of mine. I’ve had discussions with him, and I’ve said, “ Dave, you and I when we went to school didn’t face the tuitions these kids are facing now. What are we going to do about it?” All kinds of responses: “We’re working on it,” “We’re freezing things,” “We’re trying to assist the universities so maybe their tuitions don’t go up.” From my perspective as a federal person, no: the federal MP is in Mr Hancock’s face saying, “Dave, you have to do something about this, and the residents of Edmonton Strathcona want you to do something about it, and if you won’t, then I’ll take action and I’ll ask my government to take action to assist those people in postsecondary education. So to me it’s access, number one, so that education is affordable. If we get into the area of what the Liberal government’s trying to do to advance scientific research, and the number of research chairs being given out across the country, so that at the advanced learning stages you’re also creating centres of excellence. NINT is part of that; if you’re really going to walk the walk and talk the talk, you might as well start where people are looking at the fringes of where technology is. I remember at universities in the 1970s and 1980s, there were places where federal funding went into research on something really stupid: how to deal with properly deconstructing tar sands to make it economically viable. Where did that go? I know that half the things I’m involved in now didn’t even exist when I was in university, and I know half the things the university students are going to be working on don’t even exist. So our role is to make sure that happens. ... What’s important is that the federal government plays a role in intervening, and I’m disturbed by the Conservative philosophy of, “Let everybody else figure out how this is going to happen; let everybody else, through their parents”—I’m going to use the phrase “fend for themselves;” I don’t want to get overly trite about this, but honestly—“let things just work out; there’s too much of the federal treasury being wasted on these things.” I’m at the other end of the spectrum completely. Every dollar I’ve ever put into my education has assisted me; every dollar I’ve ever put into my son’s and daughter’s education has assisted them, and that should not stop. We don’t live in a country where someone else is going to take care of that.

Are there any aspects of your party's platform that you disagree with or are unsure of?

I don’t think disagreement; I think the role of the west is an area where the party should understand the kind of role Alberta should play, and I think it’s difficult when there aren’t enough elected representatives from that party in Alberta. I think the party needs to do a better job of, if you will, working with the west and Alberta. Alberta is unfairly seen, not just by the party, but by others in central Canada, as sort of a stereotypical area; the area’s diversity is something that people should come to understand, but it’s difficult for that image to be played having [Conservative MP] Myron Thompson and other luminaries like that who represent Alberta on the national stage. The Anne McLellans of the world are few and far between; articulate University graduates who are speaking for the average person. I think the second area the party has to do better in is electoral reform, but that’s a grass roots thing that I think the party will listen to. What I hear at the doors is that people want a change in the electoral system. People are saying maybe we should rethink first-past-the-post, what are you doing about senate reform? We’ve got the party to the point where we want an elected senate; what kind of elected senate? I’m totally against what the Conservatives are saying: an elected senate, just do it. I’m against Alberta having six of the 105 senators, and we’ll negotiate the distribution of senators later. It ain’t gonna happen later; Ontario and Québec aren’t going to give up 48 senators to Alberta. The fact all the parties can say an elected senate makes sense is a building block, but I think the Liberal party misunderstands how important it is in the west.

What, if any, reforms need to be made to Canada's government structure (such as electoral or senate reform)?

I have real big issues with first-past-the-post; at the end of the day, if number one doesn’t get 50 per cent plus one, number one should go against number two, and a week after the election we do the whole thing again, and we elect somebody with at least 50 per cent of the vote. That also gets away from the vote-splitting issue that makes things a little more difficult for some of the parties. The Liberals and NDP together have always had more votes [in Edmonton Strathcona] than the Conservatives, so that tells us that we’re not a Conservative riding, but with the nature of the vote, people think, “You vote Conservative through and through, virtually consistently for 40 years.” I think Canadians are so frustrated that there needs to be that sort of watershed change in the system. In terms of senate reform, I think Canadians want to see federal-provincial discussions to move it to a different level. And I haven’t seen a proportional representation proposal that works on a federal level yet, but I’d be willing to see some put forward so we can at least have some logical discussion. ... Elected representatives have to start speaking out loud about these things and generating some ideas. When you’re the guy coming in for the first time, these are easy issues to adopt.

Government ethics have been a major issue in this campaign. What do you think needs to be done to reassure voters of their government's integrity?

One, people who’ve stolen from the federal government should be prosecuted, and those files have been turned over to the RCMP; let them continue to review what’s happened in the Gomery inquiry. Those who haven’t stolen from the government but have engaged in phony contracts should be sued; take away their houses, take away their furs, do whatever it takes. Ethics requires accountability from that perspective. But at the same time, understand that some of the Liberal additions into government, like strengthening the position of the auditor general, are working. The fact that these people could engage in such a scheme thinking they would ever be able to get away with it; with the current structure of the auditor general’s office, no one will get away with it ever again. You have accountability in terms of people auditing what you’re doing, and in the fullness of time this thing comes forward. We put in, and it died in the last session, whistleblower legislation; I think it’s important to allow civil servants to identify issues and not worry about their jobs being at risk. So I would introduce more whistleblower legislation. ... I also think we need to elect ethical people. We have a three-time incumbent who’s stood up in Parliament and said he lied; that’s not the person you want representing you as having the highest ethics in government. He has a party that’s extremely vocal about this; he’s rather timid about this, for good reason. Ethics start with the people you elect.

The national campaign has taken a decidedly negative turn in recent days. How do you feel about that, and how do you think the local campaign has compared?

At the doors locally, people have been upset about the way the national campaign is happening. The voters at the door are saying, “All they’re doing is yelling at each other; we didn’t want this election; does it really matter if it’s going to be this minority or that minority?” To some extent, you’re getting a very negative reaction to having to go back to the polls twice in two years, and knowing it’s unlikely to be a majority government, and knowing that if there’s another minority, we may be doing this again. They’re not pleased about that. I’ve had a bit of reaction in the last week that, if the Conservatives are going to do well, then maybe we don’t need Mr Jaffer. That’s an interesting nuance that wasn’t there a couple weeks ago. It used to be, “Andy, you’re a nice man, but I need the Liberals out, so I have to put my vote over here.” Now, some of those folks are saying, “I don’t think I have to put my vote in the Conservative camp.” ... On the local level, a three-time incumbent should be able to show some progress as a national leader. I have nothing negative to say about him, but he should be able to put his eight years of public service up against my 25, and you should be able to judge who would make the best representative. What’s happening in the national campaign, for the party strategists, I’m sure is the nightmare scenario. But as a local candidate, I have to go door-to-door. The people are watching me, and they’re watching Jaffer, and they’re asking who’s going to be the better representative. In this particular riding, I can tell you there hasn’t been a lot of talk about the national campaign.

Source:http://www.gateway.ualberta.ca/view.php?aid=5398