Meille töihin?
Vapaa Sana ottaa vastaan Suomesta Centre for International Mobilityn kautta harjoittelijoita. Monikulttuurinen Toronto ja sen mediakenttä ovat todennäköisesti mielenkiintoinen kokemus. Hakemukset hoitaa CIMO Helsingissä. Lue tästä mitä Vapaa Sana edellyttää.
Muuhun palkkaamiseen VS:llä ei ole taloudellisia mahdollisuuksia.

Kolumnit
Vapaassa Sanassa julkaistuja toimittajien kolumneja. Keväällä 2009 kolumneja kirjoitti Aku Karjalainen, elokuusta 2009 Vesa Lahtinen.

Toronto uudelle?
Mitä kaupungin perinteinen suomalaiskenttä voi tarjota tulokkaalle? Kaupungin "vanhat suomalaiset" varmasti yllättävät nykysuomalaisen, mutta kokemus voi olla kiinnostavakin.

.

Mikä ihmeen Vapaa Sana?

Vapaa Sana on riippumaton viikkosanomalehti, joka ilmestyy kerran viikossa Torontossa. Lehden nimi periytyy 1930-luvulta.

Nimi johtaa joskus lehteä tuntemattoman pitämään Vapaata Sanaa ns hengellisenä lehtenä. Sitä se ei kuitenkaan ole.

Näillä sivuilla tarjoamme poimintoja sisällöstä, emme koko aineistoa. Vapaa Sana on tilauspohjainen lehti. Vuosikerta maksaa Kanadassa 100 dollaria ja GST-veron, nopeammin kirjepostina 150 dollaria.Tilaukset numeroon 1(416) 321 0808, klo 10-13 Toronton aikaa arkisin.

Yhtiömme

Kustannusyhtiö Vapaa Sana Press julkaisee viikkosanomalehtiä Vapaa Sana (Toronto) ja Canadan Sanomat (Thunder Bay). Yhtiön internetsivustot ovat www.vapaasana.com, www.canadansanomat.com ja www.finnishcanadian.com.

Yhtiön omistajapohja käsittää toistakymmentätuhatta kanadansuomalaista.

Kyselyjen johdosta ilmoitamme, että internetosoite vapaasana.net ei liity tämän kustannusyhtiön toimintaan.

Historiamme

Kesällä 2008 ilmestyi Lauri Toiviasen kirja Vapaan Sanan vaiheista. Tämän linkin takana voitte lukea myös VS:n 75-vuotisjuhlanumeron reportaaseja ja haastatteluja.

Finnish-Canadian businessmen. Does the Canadian attitude prevail or the Finnish view, or something in-between?

Canadian environmental leadership gets a bad grade as businessmen of Finnish extraction comment on the results of the Copenhagen Climate Summit. Vapaa Sana asked some Finnish Canadians involved in business to comment in the wake of Copenhagen. Not all the persons we approached had the time to respond. Vapaa Sana will continue this debate later .

How did you perceive the outcome of the Copenhagen Summit from a Canadian perspective?

AUVINEN: Unfortunately, Canada’s international reputation suffered as a result of Copenhagen Summit. For this reason, the Summit was a failure for Canada.
KANKAALA: I’m not 100% familiar of the results of the Copenhagen summit, but did read something about it...so I will only say , it’s a challenge for Canada...
TURKKI: I’m not sure I can speak from a Canadian perspective, but I would say that it was a very weak accord since no real emissions targets were established and the agreement imposes obligations only on the developed countries that have ratified it.  Canada has shown little in the way of initiative to combat emissions, and was given many “fossil” awards as a result.

How much would does the U.S. have influence on Canadian policies regarding climate change?

AUVINEN: Prime Minister Harper has said that Canada’s policies must be consistent with the policies in the U.S. In this sense, Canada does not seem to have an independent climate change policy; it simply appears to be following the U.S.
KANKAALA: U.S. is our Southern neighbour and a superpower, there will be always some influence from that direction, it was a bit different during Mr. Bush´s time than that of Mr. Obama’s presidential time...I think that Mr. Obama’s time is more positive for Canada...
TURKKI: Canada has recently looked to the United States for environmental leadership. The Bush administration did virtually nothing on the climate change agenda and our current government followed the Bush administration’s lead.   Even if another party were to win the next Canadian election, I believe it would be politically difficult for them to push for strong environmental policies.  

How probable you consider the theory that man has had a significant impact on climate?

AUVINEN: I think that it is highly probable that human activity is contributing to global warming. While there is always room for some doubt, my view is that we must err on the side of caution since the consequences of mistakenly concluding that our activities are not contributing, are simply too serious.
KANKAALA: It’s very obvious , that man has the main influence to the climate change - and vise versa, also man has the best possibillity to influence positive change...
TURKKI: I would say that man does have an effect on climate.  Carbon dioxide emissions can be measured from any industrial site in the world. I also believe that some non-human sources of carbon dioxide, such as the pine beetle infestation in British Columbia, do not get enough media attention.  Some scientists believe the carbon dioxide emissions from the dying pine forests in British Columbia are greater than those from the tar sands in Alberta. 

Prime minister Harper has said he is satisfied with the outcome of the Summit. At the same time environmental pressure groups have dubbed Canada ´the fossil of the year´. How would you rate Mr. Harper´s policies and achievements on environmental issues, and on climate change in particular?

AUVINEN: The main problem is that when we talk about “environmental and climate change policy” we are really talking about jobs and economics. The imposition of measures to limit carbon emissions typically result in an additional cost to business. Faced with such additional costs, companies will move their activities to countries where they won’t face such costs, if they can. For example, if Canada enacted a climate change policy that placed a cost on business, but the U.S. did not, we would see some business moving from Canada to the U.S. with resulting Canadian job losses. Prime Minister Harper is probably satisfied with the Copenhagen agreement because it allows Canada to continue to follow the US and it doesn’t have an immediate implications for the Alberta oil and gas industry which has become the economic engine in Canada. Taking this approach doesn’t demonstrate international leadership on the climate change issue, but it is realistic from an economic perspective.
KANKAALA: I will give a school grade of 5 out of 10. In Finland this could mean having to take special classes. So Mr. Harper has to do his homework better, if he wants to reach higher grades...
TURKKI: Prime Minister Harper does not see a weak environmental agenda as a reason for voting out the Conservative party.  The Liberals under Stephane Dion tried to position the environment and a carbon tax as their main platform in the last election and failed miserably.   The current government has few environmental achievements, but by avoiding discussion on climate change Mr. Harper is not being held accountable to lofty environmental promises.

Are international summits the most effective way to combat climate change? Could any other types of initiatives be conceived of?

AUVINEN: Climate change, and the economic implications surrounding it, are truly international issues. The competing interests of countries from around the world must somehow be reconciled to stop or limit global warming in a way that doesn’t unfairly limit economic growth. I don’t know if “summits” are the most effective way to address these issues but it is clear that the effort must have broad international participation and support.
KANKAALA: I believe that political and democratic way is the most effective way to influence and compact the climate change at this stage,but it’s not the only way to influence. We will always need a strong public opinion as the alternative for the political leaders opinions...
TURKKI: I think summits are the only way.  Outside of Copenhagen or Kyoto, climate change negotiations could move forward if many major economies such as the G8 group and a major developing economy such as China or India showed some environmental stewardship together.

What sort of harm could carbon emission cuts do to the Canadian business life? Could there be any advantages for business?

AUVINEN: As mentioned in response to an earlier question, placing limits on carbon emissions in Canada could result in businesses moving to other countries and job losses. Of course, the opposite side of the coin is that there rarely seems to be a limit to man’s ingenuity and ability to adapt. New technologies are emerging in the green energy sector, recycling and other green businesses. We are already seeing thousands of jobs being created by green businesses and it is likely that this will continue.
KANKAALA: If we see that to invest to the future is harmful, that agreement will harm Canada, but this question can not be measured in money, we have to be ready to change our thinking...I’m involved today in bio mass fuel trade, which is an alternative to the fossil fuels , but probably not more then 20 years...something new and better will come up after that...business have to be always creative...
TURKKI: No doubt there would be costs to Canadian business if carbon emissions were cut.  However, it is not sustainable to have inefficient industries continue to emit carbon dioxide and other pollutants.  At some point Canadian industries need to reach environmental standards comparable to other developed economies.  When that point arrives, there will be resistance by many in the business community to put funds toward environmental improvements.  It has happened before in the Canadian energy and mining industries, among others.

Questions written by Vesa Lahtinen.