LETTERS TO THE EDITOR
24Jan07
London Free Person


Energy-from-waste site viable garbage solution

London had a solution to our waste disposal, but our civic leaders must have disposed of their backbone when they were elected. The energy-from-waste plant at the hospital on Commissioners Road disposed of 60 per cent of London's garbage, but was shut down due to protestations of self-serving busybodies. I used to live in the apartments directly across from the plant and never once had any problem with smell or smoke.

So now, instead of burning our garbage at such high temperatures that the output was negligible, we are filling up the landfills. Perhaps our civic leaders need to think beyond tomorrow's self-congratulatory headlines and actually have a long-term plan for the city and the inherent problems that come with a growing populace.

Bradley Bannerman

London


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Owner not to blame for shooting in bar

Regarding the column, Tell me who is at fault? (Jan. 17).

Although Ian Gillespie's lecture on personal responsibility was enlightening, it does not apply to the shooting in a downtown bar.

Gillespie contends the owner of the bar is responsible for the shooting as he should monitor his patrons. Patrons, however, have minds of their own and unless they are overserved or underage, the bar owner is not to blame for their actions. The perpetrator pulled the trigger and the perpetrator should be the focus of Gillespie's shaming -- not the owner of the bar.

This business owner is responsible for paying taxes. These taxes are then appropriated to services and programs, such as the police and Project Disarm, which combat the growing number of gun offences in London. The heightened gun crime we experience in our core is a local issue that requires social solutions, not finger-pointing at local businesses.

Jennifer Mitchell

London


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Rural funding gripe avoids important point

In the article, Grit MP cries foul over rural 'slush fund' (Jan. 19) Paul Steckle says 90 per cent of the Canada-Ontario Municipal Rural Infrastructure Fund grants went to Tory ridings in Southwestern Ontario. It is unfortunate this number does not reflect the whole truth. As most readers will note, Steckle's riding is one of few rural Grit ridings that qualify for the program in Southwestern Ontario, the rest are Tory. Obviously if most ridings in Southwestern Ontario are blue, most funding will go to Tory-held ridings.

Chad Swance

Exeter


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Mental-health patients getting lowest priority

Having been a volunteer as well as a patient at St. Joseph's Health Care, I have no qualms with the continued redevelopment of the complex. What I do find offensive, however, is that those in charge of the hospital restructuring in London have so far managed to find the money, time and space to accommodate all patients except for the acute mental health patients, who are forced to languish in the subhuman psychiatric wards at London Health Sciences Centre's South Street campus while waiting for the completion of the north tower of LHSC's Victoria Hospital.

I am sure those responsible will be able to provide all sorts of justifications, financial and otherwise, for their actions, but it is obvious those with mental health issues have, as usual, been given the lowest priority.

Those who have made the decisions should spend a week incarcerated as a patient on the ward at South Street so they can experience the dirty, disgusting, primitive, de-humanizing and ultimately soul-destroying facility where respecting a patient's self-worth and intrinsic dignity is obviously of no concern.

Kathryn Schade

London


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Green Party is national

Regarding the editorial, Kyoto questions pose quandary (Jan. 21).

I'm so glad you are asking our federal party leaders pointed questions about the Kyoto accord, but when you refer to "Canada's three national political parties," your counting is a bit sloppy. Didn't I read an earlier editorial saying the Greens should be included in the national TV debates? So why not include them in your own inquiries?

Jeff Culbert

London


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Support Oneida battle over Toronto's trash

Regarding the article, First Nations file landfill challenge (Jan. 23). I wish the Oneida First Nation of the Thames all the best in fighting Toronto's waste. It was disheartening to witness the last-minute and lacklustre performance of our city politicians on this issue. Defeatism ruled the day and it was written off as a fait accompli when the topic was mentioned during the municipal election campaign.

It is my sincere hope Londoners will support the Oneida in this endeavour, as they have so much to lose and nothing to gain. Have they not been punished enough?

Hayley McPhail

London


A modest suggestion


Socialist presidential candidate Segolene Royal has become the latest politician in France to step into deep doo-doo on the issue of Quebec independence.

After meeting with Parti Quebecois leader Andre Boisclair in Paris Monday, Royal evoked memories of Charles de Gaulle's infamous "Vive le Quebec libre" speech while he was visiting that province in 1967.

Royal, who has a reputation in France for being gaffe-prone, observed that Quebec and France share the common positions of "sovereignty and Quebec's freedom." Oops.

For this she was rightly denounced by Prime Minister Stephen Harper, Quebec Premier Jean Charest and federal Liberal Leader Stephane Dion, who nailed it when he cautioned Royal: "You do not wish for the dismantling of a friendly country." Bravo!

We hope this incident finally convinces Dion what a bad idea it is for him to continue to be a dual citizen of France and Canada, especially if he ever becomes PM.

It's because, in politics, perception is everything.

That said, given the fascination French politicians seem to have with Quebec independence, we have a counter-offer for the people of France. We propose they become Canadians by joining up with the province of Quebec.

Here are our top five reasons (we don't have room for 10) why France should jump at this offer.

1) New opportunity for the French to look down their noses at millions more people who speak French. This in addition to the millions they already look down their noses at for speaking English.

2) Easy access to Fox News in the U.S., where French politicians can appear to explain why they are not, in fact, cheese-eating surrender monkeys.

3) French finally get to taste some decent food -- the pure joy of a fresh, warm Montreal bagel.

4) French know-how applied to interpreting Quebec's sign law, rendering it totally ineffective.

5) With the instant addition of 60 million new French-speaking citizens to Canada, francophone Quebecers no longer feel their language is in danger of disappearing. Desire for separation ends.

Except, of course, in Alberta, which now really wants out.