This bad tax policy feels like loan sharking
Re: “A signed deal, a new tax, and no justice,” commentary, Sept. 10.
I fully sympathize with the writer and feel he was treated in a shameful way and should be made whole along with any others treated in the same egregious manner.
It was my opinion that the Clark government as well as the Campbell government before her were making decisions on policy that would provide good optics rather than viable solutions.
Heading into each election or budget cycle they would want to be able to claim that they held the line on increases in spending in health care and education in particular as they were two of the largest portfolios. Those policies clearly contributed to many of the current problems in both.
Failed policies are one thing but this strikes me as egregiously wrong and would no doubt give anyone considering immigration under this program serious doubts about the trustworthiness of our government.
The writer is clearly the exact type of individual we wish to attract through our immigration policies.
My own family came to Canada after my father spent two years working in many different jobs trying to get established in his field. We became Canadian citizens when I was 17 years old. Everything we had was built on hard work.
Fortunately there was no large up-front cost.
What Eric Chang has been subjected to has more in common with loan sharking practices than immigration policy.
Jim Dooner
Victoria
A step toward democracy’s collapse
I urge conservative voters to consider all of the ramifications of having a convoy embracing, Trumpesque style, chaotic federal government in Ottawa.
Appealing to the far right portion of the population by promising less government will result in less health care and public health guidance, less police funding, and in general less of many government funded initiatives, and a lot of chaos.
Just think back on the half truth rhetoric of the Trump inner circle a few years back and how divisive that rhetoric was for the American citizens.
Next we may have a government in Canada that sits idle while the next freedom convoy attacks and occupies Parliament hill. The collapse of democracy starts with falsehoods, not facts.
Mike Wilkinson
Duncan
Want blue skies again? Well, stop travelling
Did you notice at the height of the pandemic, the sky became a brighter blue? Less car traffic, minimal airline flights. Less pollution.
We learned that it was possible to conduct a lot of business from home, and that business trips were not as essential if much of the business could be conducted with a Zoom meeting. We had innovative ways to stay in touch with friends and family.
Now as the pandemic (at least theoretically) has eased, people have the urge to “get away” and the airline industry is barely coping.
What is missing from the discussion is the fact that (according to Transport Canada) greenhouse gas emissions from our airlines rose by 74 per cent from 2005 to 2019.
What is Canada doing about it? The federal government is currently developing an action plan to reduce aviation emissions. At this stage, it seems that the only consultations planned are with the airline industry.
Meanwhile, the Danish government has pledged that by 2030 all domestic flights in that country will be fossil fuel–free and create zero carbon emissions. To be sure, the country is much smaller and distances not as great, but surely Canada can do better.
Citizens have a part to play in addressing the burgeoning carbon footprint in the airline industry. Can we all do something to reduce our travel footprint, and perhaps spend some of that money at home instead to support local businesses?
S.A. McBride
Cordova Bay
Saskatchewan model sets the example
Re: “In Cook Street Village, nurses at health co-op are taking on patients,” Sept. 10.
My husband and I moved to Nanaimo 10 years ago. Prior to that we lived most of our lives in Saskatchewan, the place where Medicare was born.
For 30 years we were member-patients of the Saskatoon Community Clinic – “Your Healthcare Co-op”. I also served a term on the clinic’s board of directors.
At the clinic we received care from our GP, a nurse practitioner, physiotherapist, pharmacist, optometrist, nutritionist, lab technicians, and social worker all under one roof.
All health care professionals were salaried. There are many community clinics in Saskatchewan. In my mind this delivery model makes so much sense.
Why aren’t we offering this model in B.C.? It’s not rocket science.
Joy Adams Bauer
Nanaimo
Ride this way, but walk that way
Re: “Segregate cyclists for the safety of all,” letter, Sept. 10.
I agree with the concerns regarding the negative interactions between pedestrians and cyclists on the region’s multi-use trails.
As the writer observes: “A cyclist doesn’t always know which way a pedestrian will move if the pedestrian is not aware of the bicycles presence and so the cyclist needs to announce themselves.”
There is, however, a simple solution to this problem that will solve most of the issues: have the pedestrians walk facing the oncoming cyclists.
We tell people to walk facing the traffic on roads without sidewalks for a very good reason. Why shouldn’t we require that on multi-use pathways? They have, after all, effectively become highways over the past decade!
Adrian Kershaw
Sidney
Yes, family physicians know their patients
Re: “A health-care summary in 10 quick points,” letter, Aug. 26.
Although I do agree with a number of the points in the letter, I take umbrage with the statement that “the concept of the GP ‘knowing’ the patient is ridiculous.”
This statement does great disservice to the many physicians, both in family practice and specialists, whom I have known over 46 years of being a registered nurse.
You discount the specialist who had tears in her eyes standing in a hallway telling me that she attended the funeral of one of her young patients, the hospitalist that I have seen upset at the death of someone who they have been caring for, the family practitioners who have gone to a palliative person’s house to speak with them about last wishes, even though they don’t do house calls and don’t have time to do it, the family practitioners who have popped into the hospital to see one of their patients, just to say hello (having no say in their care while they’re in hospital).
I have had seven or eight family practitioners as an adult, as well as seeing some others at walk-in clinics in the few years that I did not have a doctor.
Every one of them made an effort to treat me as an individual and not just a number in their busy day.
Gail Blais, retired RN
Sooke
Be safe, and stay away from rivers
Re: “Having a fun day shouldn’t be what ends your life,” Sept. 4.
In my opinion tubing in a river should not be allowed, period.
Having lost my step-mom and brother to drownings, I believe there is no “safe” way to have fun in a river.
Rivers are unpredictable and conditions can change quickly and without warning. One wrong decision or wrong move and that’s it for you.
Don’t tempt fate. Stay out of the rivers. If you’re going to wade in, practice safety and use a life jacket.
Pam Bevan
Victoria
We need adequate health care, not just a doctor
Re: “Health-care staff crunch forcing shift to ‘teams’: expert,” Sept. 6.
I suggest that people who have signs saying “Everyone should have a doctor” get rid of that sign for one that says “Everyone should receive adequate health care.”
This approach makes total sense for me. This article noted that the fee-for-service for physicians is a barrier and needs to change.
Doctors are vital but so are nurses and other health professions who should team up and provide what I think would be adequate health care. Let’s change our way of thinking.
Eric Jones
Victoria
Police set example for American officers
The response of our police officers at the bank robbery in Saanich make me proud to be a Canadian. It is difficult not to compare their response with the response of the U.S. police in the recent school massacre.
Although armed, as all U.S. police are, they procrastinated for an hour before daring to subdue the shooter, thus leading to many more deaths.
It also adds weight to the argument that having the ability of the public to carry handguns in the U.S. is not an effective deterrent to such attacks. Unfortunately, it is unlikely that such a comparison will reach the U.S. news services and be used as an argument against their bizarre gun laws.
Clearly, our police forces are very well trained and will always be prepared to carry out their duty. No doubt they will all receive commendations for their bravery.
We pray that the six injured officers make a swift and full recovery.
Dr. John Dufton
Duncan
Think the NDP are bad? Remember the Liberals?
Re: “The NDP has nothing to talk about,” letter, Aug. 26.
I sure hope the letter-writer recalls the reign of error, the Gordon Campbell years.
A egomaniac one-man-band premier who built monuments to himself, the Sea-to-Sky Highway and the Vancouver Convention Centre.
A premier and his lapdogs who ran roughshod over teachers and forced young people to work in smoke-filled bars. A premier that “privatized” B.C. Ferries in a sham move.
And don’t forget about that HST debacle — cave in to business.
All David Eby has to do is be better (almost impossible not to be) than B.C. Liberal attorneys general Mike de Jong, Shirley Bond and Suzanne Anton. Be better than Rich Coleman, Christy Clark and Kevin Falcon.
You don’t know how good you’ve got it.
Grant Maxwell
Nanaimo
Harm reduction policy is not reducing deaths
The king has no clothes — but I am not talking about Donald Trump, I am talking about our drug “harm reduction program.”
When we review the overdose stats since the policy has been implemented we can draw only one conclusion: It is not working.
I can now be pilloried on two accounts: I am not a true believer, and how can I speak against the holy grail of harm reduction?
Forget the first, you are either of the cult or outside of the cult, and I am outside. The important discussion must occur around the second, a detailed examination of the harm reduction program.
I firmly believe addiction to hard drugs is a medical, not a legal, societal problem. The societal issue comes from the need to obtain cash to buy the product and our inability to solve the housing problem.
I do think that the harm reduction program might be giving implicit approval to try and use hard drugs. Is the drug seller whispering in my ear that “we have nice clean needles for you to use,” a softly lit safe place to relax and try our product and don’t worry if something bad happens, we are there with the antidote to save you to try again?
I certainly don’t think any of the supporters of harm reduction think that, but it is hard to critically examine a policy when you have a dog in the fight.
I would like to see a group that individually doesn’t have a dog in the fight to critically examine the harm reduction program and redirect our course to reduce the deaths from the crisis.
A container ship takes time and kilometres to change course. Can we try to give the captain a new heading to try to solve this shared problem of drug use and addiction?
David Gray
Sidney
SEND US YOUR LETTERS
• Email letters to: letters@timescolonist.com
• 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.
