Mitzi Dean takes the fall for failures of others
Minister of Children and Family Development Mitzi Dean has been fired.
Period. Full stop. I don’t know Dean, and I have no idea how competent she is (or was).
But I do know bureaucracy and I know that Dean was not directly responsible for the disaster in Port Alberni.
There were workers in direct contact with the victims. They reported (or were supposed to report) to a local supervisor.
That supervisor was supposed to report to a district supervisor, who was supposed to report to the assistant deputy minister, who, well, that’s enough.
Dean was at least five steps away from what happened. So why didn’t any of the people who were actually responsible for the disaster lose their jobs?
Or did they, but no-one has reported it? This smacks of a witch hunt to me.
Ian Cameron
Brentwood Bay
Roundhouse shows split between young and old
Re: “Roundhouse buildings would be too high,” letter, Jan. 20.
The projects like Roundhouse with increased density are urgently needed to address the housing needs of our present and future population.
I recently attended the public hearings on this project and was surprised to see that almost 90 per cent of the people who oppose this project are older residents; whereas the majority of those who are in favour of the Roundhouse project are university students, young families, young workers and young business owners who desperately need housing for themselves, for their growing families and workers.
It is ironic that the older generation is advocating the form of future social and community spaces and housing for the future generations that the present younger generation — the custodian of the future — vehemently opposes.
Those who are arguing that the tall buildings will be shading the small space should go to Yates Street and have a look. It does not matter whether you are on the north side or south side of these buildings or how close you are to the next building, every single unit in these buildings is desirable and is occupied.
The organized opposition to the project is more to do with “not in my backyard” and less with the density.
Some in the surrounding buildings seem to believe that perhaps their right to an unimpeded view of the entire oceanfront corridor supersedes the right of those who desperately need housing.
I hope the mayor and the council listen to the voices of the younger generation on which the future of all of us depends.
Paramjit Singh
Victoria
Tired of hearing about short-term rentals
I’ve lived in Victoria for nine years. When I moved here, I could afford to pay for a room in a basement suite in Gordon Head — somewhere that made sense for an undergraduate student at UVic. I expected that.
What I didn’t expect was that nine years later with a masters degree and a well-paying corporate job that I’d still be stuck in a basement suite with a roommate paying $1,000 a month.
I am exhausted and extremely disheartened with the vocal pushback against the new short-term rental regulations. It’s incredibly hard to hear from people who own more than one property about how much income they’ll lose when these restrictions come into effect.
I’ve seen claims that “it’s not working” when the legislation hasn’t even been enacted yet. I get it — you’re losing potentially hundreds of thousands of dollars on a (risky) investment. It happens all the time, all over the world.
I don’t understand how that trumps the rest of us having a place to live. We are in a genuine crisis that causes real material harms. Anyone who lives downtown knows that.
Losing money doesn’t physically hurt you. Sleeping in a tent for years … none of us can even fathom what that does to you.
I get that people really think this won’t change anything, but I’m so relieved some level of government is at least trying and treating this like the crisis it is.
Sweeping legislative change is exactly the course of action we should be on. Working professionals like myself who are long-term residents of this city deserve a chance, and everyone deserves a home.
Please put your panic into perspective. It’s OK to admit you made a risky investment and it didn’t pay off.
Don’t expect the rest of us who are struggling to pay for basic necessities to feel much sympathy.
Daniel Thon
Victoria
Walkable communities vital to Victoria
Recently I read city councillors are motivated by changes which limit traffic on Government Street and keep cars off roads now serving as bike lanes to think of other ways and places to limit cars in the city.
The five-way intersection at James Bay’s only commercial centre was suggested as a possible location for change. Really?
It’s not as if this is a tourist strip like Government Street. I can’t picture families and seniors walking into this block and carrying out bags of groceries or pharmacy purchases.
Plus James Bay residents are still recovering from the impacts of the changes to Superior Street to facilitate bike lanes which limit residential traffic into and out of this small peninsula.
I won’t go into that as so many others have written about this and other bike lane fallout such as summarily making sections of Simcoe Street one way.
Finally, James Bay is already recognized as one of the most walkable communities in the city.
Surely city councillors have enough on their plates already working on serious problems like lack of housing, ballooning costs for services and the precarious state of downtown.
In that regard, how about focusing on the basics such as cleaning sidewalks and emptying trash bins. I frequently read that steps are being taken in this regard, but whatever they are, it’s not enough.
I don’t look forward to another summer of cracked, dirty sidewalks covered with bird droppings.
Unfortunately, not all streets get the attention Government Street does. Not Douglas Street that’s for sure!
Irene Robertson
James Bay
Keep the buildings, don’t create a park
While I commend the City of Victoria on their commitment and vision of incorporating green space into the downtown core, I can’t help but wonder about the tearing down of good buildings to facilitate a park.
It seems like a bit of a disconnect: We’re grappling with trying to find housing solutions for our homeless population and at the same time demolishing buildings that could potentially serve (even if temporarily) as shelter.
The Romeo’s and Urbana buildings could work well in tandem, one for housing, the other for social services support.
The ecological footprint of demolition materials needs to be factored in as well. I’m all for greening the downtown core, and if I resided downtown, I would definitely find huge value in having a park near where I live.
But does this particular vision make sense?
Bonnie Farris
Sooke
Many other issues before a privilege project
How can we even consider a privilege-based project such as the Roundhouse when we have so many problems with poverty, drug use stemming from poverty, unhoused citizens, big transportation issues, street tent communities and appalling relations with First Nations? Issues that need funds directed to them to address them right now.
Why are we considering adding to the privilege of this city when we should be working on resolving the social issues that are and have been escalating for the past 25 or 30 years?
Georgina Kirkman
Victoria
Make transit system an essential service
Climate change and clean energy: Government incompetence leads the way.
The government wants people to stop using their cars and trucks due to clean energy needs to reduce climate change.
Yet the government won’t legislate public transport (transit) as an essential service, allowing them to strike when and where they please, causing income losses for hundreds of thousands of persons.
Stop pandering to unions, legislate transit workers back to work and crush the unions.
Government incompetence abounds. You can’t fix stupid, but we can elect it.
James Cooper
Victoria
SEND US YOUR LETTERS
• Email: [email protected]
• Mail: Letters to the editor, Times Colonist, 201-655 Tyee Rd., Victoria, B.C. V9A 6X5
• Submissions should be no more than 250 words; subject to editing for length and clarity. Provide your contact information; it will not be published. Avoid sending your letter as an email attachment.
