Re: “Victoria sewage-dumping creates a new stink,” June 10.
It’s difficult to believe that a large U.S. city newspaper could publish such an editorial without verifying the facts.
Every ocean scientist at the University of Victoria and the University of Washington finds that our present sewage system is perfectly adequate. This kind of slander isn’t very neighbourly — particularly toward a nearby community that sends millions of tourist dollars to Seattle every year.
Shouldn’t it be Victorians who boycott Seattle?
Thomas O. Davis
Victoria
Victoria sewage no threat to Seattle
Re: “Victoria sewage-dumping creates a new stink,” comment, June 10.
The indignant gist of this criticism from Seattle is factually wrong. I was at a meeting three or four years ago when maps of the flows of water in Puget Sound and the Juan de Fuca Strait were shown. The information was from an oceanographer in Washington state.
She clearly showed that the daily inflow of water through the strait followed mainly the southern (Port Angeles) shore. The daily outflow from Puget Sound passed closer to the northern (Victoria) shore of the strait.
Recently, I read that politicians in the Seattle area are worried that their storm sewers are contaminating Puget Sound.
So Victoria is responsible for none of the Puget Sound pollution, but the Seattle area might be sending pollution to Victoria. Perhaps the Seattle Times editors should check their facts.
Dr. Michael J. Platts
Victoria
Time to get serious about sewage plant location
Re: “Victoria sewage-dumping creates a new stink,” June 10.
Now that Seattle has made it an issue, we had better get serious about our sewage plant location.
If we want to go green, there’s a huge piece of surplus golf course in south Oak Bay on the seaward side of Beach Drive at Gonzales Point. Save money through naming rights: How about the Save-on-Foods Memorial Sewage Treatment Plant?
And for international attention, name the main sewer The Bottom Line.
Doug Porteous
Victoria
Local politicians should risk being fined
Re: “Unsettled regional sewage plan has Victoria exploring options,” June 7.
The basic problem regarding sewage disposal in the Capital Regional District is the federal regulation (and provincial support of it) that is not rationally based on scientific evidence.
If I were a local elected politician, I would simply say to the senior governments that if they want to spend taxpayers’ money so wastefully, they should take over the project and thus focus the responsibility for the tax burden on themselves. I would simply use my vote to refuse to participate.
It is said that if the CRD does not comply with the regulation, it would lose the federal and provincial contributions to implement the project and local governments and councillors would be subject to fines. If I were a councillor, I would simply run the risk and leave the political fallout on the senior government politicians.
Would the current federal and provincial elected officials (or future ones, given the long timelines) really have the political courage to fine local officials for refusing to spend almost a billion dollars on such a needless scheme? The legislative requirements for the senior governments to manage the local projects or impose local taxes are formidable, but at least it would have the benefit of having the debate focused properly on the federal and provincial politicians.
The most sensible first steps would be for local politicians to seek an extension of the project deadline and to declare their firm intention not to facilitate implementation of the current regulation.
Allan Roger
Highlands
Let’s limit guns to single-shot capacity
Re: “7,000 share rage, sadness, disbelief,” June 11.
Once again, we have the handwringing from all sides of the gun-control question. Nobody wants to take the responsibility to find a solution.
What an appalling shortage of ethics and morality. Prime Minister Stephen Harper is “outraged” at the RCMP officers’ massacre in Moncton. This is the man who spearheaded the end of the long-gun registry.
Wouldn’t a simpler solution be to allow only the sale and use of single-shot guns? If a shooter has to take the time to reload after each shot, there is far less chance of such massacres, as police officers, even if caught off guard, can respond with lethal force. Ordinary citizens would have more time to run and seek shelter from mad shooters.
If hunters don’t like this proposal, they should learn to shoot more accurately. There is no need for automatic or even semi-automatic weapons in Canada unless in the hands of law enforcement, or in the hands of military personnel during training exercises or on deployment.
It’s time for the silent majority to stand up and demand better protection from our gutless politicians who can’t seem to take action on anything unless it will buy them votes at the next election.
It’s time for a free vote in the House of Commons, without the stifling effects of Harper and his dwindling circle of hissing sycophants in the PMO.
David Hogg
Victoria
Canadian democracy is under attack
Re: “Watchful feds threaten rights,” editorial, June 8.
The editors of the Times Colonist must be congratulated for their courage in publishing this editorial.
The Harper regime in not a normal government, such as we have always known Canadian governments to have been. We may not have agreed with the stances taken by previous administrations, but never has there been the feeling that our democracy is under attack.
That situation is certainly the case now, as outlined in the editorial, and the 1.2 million requests for emails from Canadians made to the telcoms by the government last year.
What comes next from Harper and his regime?
Lorne Finlayson
Cumberland
Government appears to have a strategy
Re: “Teachers vote 86% in favour of full strike,” June 11.
If I were a cynical person, I might be tempted to think that the current dispute over education funding is all part of a strategy orchestrated by the B.C. Liberal government.
Begin negotiations with an insulting offer to the teachers, thereby provoking some job action. The next step would be to remain immovable on the original offer, causing the teachers to use the only tool in their box, which is to escalate their response. The government, meanwhile, protests that it wants a deal: “My hope is that all of that becomes unnecessary.”
When the final days of the school year approach, after all the teachers have lost a couple of thousand dollars, the government would suddenly find a few crumbs to offer the teachers — probably the amount saved by the strike — in an effort to appear as the good guys and gain the public’s support.
The government would end up looking good and not have spent a penny of additional funds, as originally planned. B.C.’s children will remain the losers, as always.
But that’s just me being cynical.
Geoffrey Mills
Sidney
Region should start rail-transit planning
Re: “Highway construction costlier than light rail,” letter, June 10.
I agree with the letter regarding light rail being more reasonable over the longer term than highway construction.
Every time I take a trip to my old home town, Victoria, I get stuck in that thing called the Colwood Crawl. The last time there was an accident, and it took an hour to get out of town.
The Capital Regional District does not seem to understand economy of scale. Costs continue to escalate, like sewage treatment. In 1996, light-rail transit was estimated at $275 million to the West Shore.
Victoria needs to take a lesson from Detroit, a bankrupt city that is building a 5.5-kilometre tram line downtown for $125 million.
B.C. Transit needs to implement detailed engineering for LRT now, so when the time for construction comes, it can be started immediately. The feds and the provincial government should pay the cost as a gift to beleaguered Victoria.
Gary M. Woodley
Courtenay
