Victoria can’t be like Copenhagen
Re: “No, Victoria council is not the devil incarnate,” column, April 4.
Columnist Trevor Hancock is the latest to join the chorus of “Remake us like Copenhagen, Amsterdam and other European ‘liveable’ cities.”
What he and all the others fail to recognize is that our cites are based upon foundations that are completely opposite to those in Europe, and are held up as shining examples of bicycle accommodation.
European cities grew out of the Middle Ages with their forms, roads, movement patterns and social structures shaped by a world before the automobile.
The die was cast long before the start of the 20th century. The car was always the outsider, unsuited to the road networks and successfully rivalled by public transit as the efficient means for mobility.
Additionally, fuel was expensive, land more costly and automobiles were not priced for mass usage. This left plenty of room for the more “liveable” assets such as bicycle accommodation. Bicycles were always part of the mix.
By contrast, North American cities saw the foundations laid, fundamentally, in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, neatly coinciding with the emergence of the automobile.
For better and worse, cheap gas, cheap land and cheap cars shaped the fabric of North American cities. They were formed to facilitate affordable individual freedom of mobility.
Public transit was the poor cousin, when it came to getting around. Bicycles were just a child’s toy, and the cities never grew to support them as serious transport.
This all makes it unreasonable to expect European archetypes and solutions to work here. No one should argue with sensible, intelligently designed infrastructure to encourage cycling.
But when designs have huge detrimental effects on traffic flows, causing increased congestion and large detours through neighbourhood side streets, they are far from “progressive.”
It is also arguable whether any increase in bike usage will ever offset the increased emissions caused by greater congestion, idling times and travel distances caused by bad bikeway designs.
Richardson Street is just the latest example of noble principles being tarnished by poor consultation, misapplied principles and bad design.
Brian Kendrick
Fairfield
Numbers show safety in European cities
There have been a lot of letters about bicycle lanes and safety issues around pedestrians in Victoria. Amsterdam and Copenhagen have been mentioned a few times.
Readers might be interested in some facts comparing the Netherlands, Denmark and North America.
Starting with automobile fatalities per million of population:
• U.S. 124 (4.5 million serious injuries)
• Canada 50
• Netherlands 35
• Denmark 34
Pedestrian deaths (2018) per million:
• U.S. 18 (actual number 5,977)
• Canada 10 (actual number 332)
• Denmark 5.1 (actual number 30)
• Netherlands 2.8 (actual number 49)
Automobiles, trucks and buses caused almost all the pedestrian and cyclist deaths in the Netherlands and Denmark. (As they do in Canada and the U.S.)
Amsterdam is the most densely populated city in Europe at 4,439 people per square kilometre, compared with Victoria at 495 people per square kilometre, which makes Amsterdam’s safety record even more impressive.
The numbers speak for themselves. The Netherlands and Denmark are much safer places for pedestrians, cyclists and drivers than the U.S. or Canada. Victoria is moving in the right direction to improve both the safety of pedestrians and cyclists.
Keep up the good work.
Phil Foster
Saanich
Doctor compensation system reversed
Re: “Poorly handled telemedicine is burdening emergency departments, potentially harming patients,” commentary, April 6.
As a retired doctor, I must agree with the “concerned Victoria emergency physicians” who expressed their concerns about telemedicine.
The pandemic has brought about a total reversal in the way primary medical care is being delivered in our province.
Previously doctors could only bill for face-to-face visits. Now they can bill for remote visits.
I have always felt that it was unfair that previously doctors could not bill for giving advice by telephone. But I never expected it would be the same value as a face-to-face visit. That seems to be happening now.
An office visit means having an office staff to run the practice, a waiting room for patients, rent for the space, and other overhead costs. In a remote visit the doctor can be in his/her home on the telephone.
It will all come down to how doctors are paid for doing their work.
How you are paid for the work you do obviously influences how you work. This will become a major item for bargaining between the government and the Doctors of B.C. in the near future.
I am glad that I am retired!
Wilfred Sigurdson
Saanich
Telemedicine is just not as effective
As a retired registered nurse, I was grateful to read the letter from emergency physicians published April 6. While practising, my greatest assessment tools were my eyes as well as my other sensory tools. Even in discussion, a comment about other psycho/social issues heightened my assessment.
Now with physician and walk-in clinic gatekeepers imposing tight restrictions on physical assessments due to COVID-19 protocols, the chance of being physically assessed is almost non-existent.
While gardening I accidently punctured my eye with a twig, which was so painful that I could not open my eye.
When I called a clinic, the receptionist asked me to send a picture, which was impossible to do, stating the doctor could not see me. I went to Victoria General Hospital’s emergency department and experienced a prolonged waiting time in pain.
A few months passed, and an inquinal hernia I have was enlarging, so I called my physician’s office to ask for an appointment for assessment.
The office receptionist requested that I send a picture and she would alert my doctor. My comment to her was that this was something that needed to be personally viewed and palpated by my physician, so she allowed a mask-to-mask appointment for assessment.
I am hearing stories from friends that are frightening and causing anxiety due to lack of personal doctor-patient assessments. There is a feeling that doctors do not seem to care any more, and this is dangerous.
As stated in the commentary, telemedicine does not always replace the need for a physical exam or an in-person visit with a primary care provider.
Also calls to reorder medications with no questions asked as to tolerance of such medications or addressing abnormal lab values can have consequences for emergency departments having to manage more acute patients who feel guilty about calling their primary care provider due to the physician gatekeepers.
I am not generalizing all physicians, yet there are enough stories such as mine that the situation needs to be addressed.
We have been told during this difficult time of COVID-19 that “we are all in this together” — this means a balanced approach to medical care and not causing one health area to take most of the load.
Wendy Campbell
Saanich
In the end, we need more physicians
Re: “Poorly handled telemedicine is burdening emergency departments, potentially harming patients,” commentary, April 6.
While telemedicine is an adjunct to, not a replacement for, in-person primary health care provider visits, a very critical point is missed by the authors.
There is a shortage of primary health care providers (family doctors and nurse practitioners) throughout British Columbia.
The Medical Services Plan rightfully uses primary health care providers as the mainstay of outpatient care and the access to specialized health care. Yet, British Columbia fails to provide every British Columbia resident with either a family doctor or a nurse practitioner.
The end result has been wait lines at walk-in clinics, urgent care centres and hospital emergency rooms. This is compounded by the improper utilization of expensive emergency rooms for routine outpatient care and the absence of both walk-in clinics and urgent care centres, especially in rural remote B.C. communities.
The time has long passed when the Ministry of Health needs to attach everyone with an MSP card to a primary health care provider. This can be done. There are solutions to this ongoing B.C. health-care crisis.
Curt Firestone
Salt Spring Island
Detain and confine the anti-maskers
Masks — to wear or not.
While I agree that everyone deserves their allotted rights and freedom, I submit that by not wearing a mask while in public that they are disrespecting mine.
I wonder if the simple answer is to detain all who refuse to wear a mask and confine them several days in a secure location and await the results of a coronavirus scan.
This way they can refuse to wear their masks and will be free again within a few days.
The thought of confinement could well change their minds.
I wear my mask because I am very elderly (90) and am an insulin dependent diabetic.
Years ago, people had far better discipline and had more respect for others. Enjoy your freedom without subjecting me to your possible virus-laden breath.
Les Quilter
Victoria
Breaking COVID-19 rules? Face serious consequences
It’s easy to say breaking COVID-19 rules will have “consequences” and “anyone hosting a non-compliant event can currently be issued a violation ticket of $2,300, while individuals face a $575 fine,” as described in the April 4 Times Colonist.
But people who break the rules, even in large advertised protests, often don’t get ticketed and of the few who do get ticketed, even fewer pay their fines.
If the government was serious about people obeying COVID-19 rules they should at least treat COVID-19 fines like traffic fines and require that they be paid before the individual can renew their driver’s licence.
Since ignoring COVID-19 rules can directly lead to serious illness and even death, we should stop treating these rules as something that can be ignored with impunity.
If a rule breaker can be directly linked to a COVID-19 death, the rule breaker should be charged with criminal negligence causing death, instead of a $575 fine.
If a driver can get eight years in jail for running a stop sign, that results in serious injuries and deaths, why aren’t illnesses and deaths resulting from breaking COVID-19 rules treated more seriously?
S.I. Petersen
Nanaimo
SEND US YOUR LETTERS
• Email letters to: [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.
