Mail bag: 09/09/21

‘Irresponsible thugs’

Dear Editor:

Seeing and hearing the irresponsible thugs try to intimidate fellow Canadians with U.S.-styled tactics is bad enough, but anti-vaxers impeding ambulances and harassing healthcare workers is the last straw.

If these thugs can’t connect the dots and see how absurd their actions are considering they are the ones most likely to end up on ventilators in these very same hospitals and cared for by these honourable healthcare workers, they should be immediately arrested, charged with hate crimes or obstruction and convicted.

And for our political “leaders”, try being a leader. Societies have minimum standards for the good of the many such as fitness requirements for being a pilot or truck driver, minimum drinking age, speed limits, drinking water standards, and on and on.

Proof of vaccination is no different.

Thomas Althouse,
Fergus

 

‘Ignorance’

Dear Editor:

It’s very interesting that with the introduction of a vaccine “passport,” many people who have previously chosen not to receive the vaccine have now decided that they will do so.

Many had declared that they would not take it believing that it was not safe and continued to believe this even after millions of recipients worldwide experienced no ill effects. Even the recent evidence that the majority of hospitalizations and deaths caused by the Delta variant are in the unvaccinated did not alter their positions.

Then along came the vaccine passport and there has been a great surge amongst these non-believers to get their shots. Could it be that many of these misguided souls were being nothing more than bloody-minded and selfish?

Could it be the priority for these people was actually just maintaining their lifestyles? With the advent of the passport they came to the realization that it would curtail their activities – no gyms, no restaurants. Now they have no problem with the vaccine.

For those who continue to refuse the vaccine, there is a good chance that they will become infected, be hospitalized or worse. And if this happens, they will be taking a bed from a sick person who has no control over their condition.

If they end up in intensive care, they could jeopardize the treatment of a cancer patient or someone with another serious illness.

This remaining segment of the population who continues to refuse the vaccine, for whatever reason, could eventually become pariahs within their own communities. Follow the science and push aside objections stemming largely from ignorance.

Get vaccinated!

Mike Shackleford,
Belwood

 

‘Informed decision’

Dear Editor:

RE: New cases of COVID-19 are back on the rise throughout the region, Aug. 26.

I picked up a copy of your paper at the Guelph Public Library last week, never having read it before.

I was quite pleased with the presentation of information in the articles, allowing discerning readers access to that information rather than twisting the narrative to suit the politics.

Nevertheless, I think there are some statistics buried on page 34 that may have been better on the front page. The information presented reveals that of the 143 persons in Ontario in hospital for COVID-19, 27 were fully vaccinated, meaning that for more than 18% of the people, the vaccination did not prevent hospitalization. For those in ICU, more than 9% (seven of 74) were not protected by the vaccine. Additionally, no information is given regarding co-morbidities.

It is important for people to have this sort of information prominently presented since one must balance the negative impacts of the vaccines with their efficacy in order to make an informed decision.

Stella Mott,
Guelph

*Editor’s note: COVID-19 vaccines are safe and effective. Breakthrough cases occur, but the fully vaccinated are far less likely to suffer serious infections, to require hospitalization, or to die than those who are unvaccinated. Anyone concerned about vaccines should speak to their physician.

 

‘Under attack’?

Dear Editor:

Our rights and freedoms are under attack on a number of fronts, largely driven by global health authorities with a few behind-the-scenes players pulling strings, misinformed governments causing knee-jerk reactions, mainstream and social media sources pandering to COVID-19 case rate fears … and, now, vax passes! It needs to stop!

We need to stop thinking in the divisive terms that the media is corralling us to and stand in solidarity with each other – vaxed and un-vaxxed alike. Ask yourself what kind of a country do you want your kids to grow up in?

Let’s take our power back, place our fears in check, and start living normally again!

Bob Berry,
Fergus

 

‘Controlling’ mayor?

Dear Editor:

Centre Wellington council is to meet again over the proposed bike lanes on St. David Street North in Fergus, as a number of councillors have heard from many constituents that weren’t happy about the decision to go ahead with bike lanes.

The vote was 4-3 to revisit, however, to rescind this will require a 2/3 majority. If the vote passed to revisit at 4-3, why would the vote to rescind have to be 5?  Control!

Our mayor says in the article, the bike lane option was “visionary” and “forward thinking” but the one statement he made – “It’s critical to have a spine for active transportation” – really offended me. He and his two crony councillors will make sure it won’t pass.

Who cares that the Fergus businesses and other constituents have had a voice and voted against this moving forward?

As I have read many times of things that are happening with our council, the mayor is very controlling.  I look at how VanLeeuwen was exonerated, but wasn’t reinstated as the deputy mayor, as Mayor Linton wouldn’t give his consent and said that he and the deputy mayor need to be on the same page. Control!

Where is the justice and fairness?  Is it time for a new mayor?  Maybe VanLeeuwen should run next time.

Judy Haddad,
Elora

*Editor’s note: The township’s procedural bylaw states a two-thirds majority vote is required for council to overturn a previous decision.

 

Toys taken?

Dear Editor:

Where did all the toys go from Webster Park on Churchhill Crescent in Fergus?

For at least two decades that park has been filled with toys and children playing happy in the sand with all the diggers, trucks, riding toys, shovels and buckets. I personally know of children coming from all around Fergus to play with these toys.

On Tuesday the township put up a sign that announced that all toys must be removed or be destroyed by the Township of Centre Wellington because of COVID-19.

What difference does it make if the toys are there or not? The slides, swings, climbers, etc. are not wiped down on a regular basis. Is there not the same germs on them as on these precious toys?

We the parents, caregivers and children would love to see the toys back. Help us please keep our kids off the internet, playing mindless games and getting no exercise.

Parents also enjoy talking, exchanging ideas and making new friends while our children are enjoying the fresh air and exercise associated with outdoor play.

Is this not what life is all about?

Marje Gray,
Fergus

 

In tears over speeding

Dear Editor:

An open letter to Guelph/Eramosa Mayor Chris White.

Once again I have come back from a walk through Eden Mills  in tears. I am 73, an essential worker (registered psychotherapist). I love my job but it can be taxing and I sit all day.

I bought myself a watch that keeps track of my steps so I can lose some COVID weight and get healthier. However, walking along my neighbourhood streets in Eden Mills literally has me in tears every time.

First of all, I do not feel safe as Barden Street does not have sidewalks. It has several curves that reduce the visibility of oncoming traffic and, as you know, cars come barreling through the village at 60 to 70km/h.  As well many of the cars are “souped” up and the drivers seem to take extra pleasure in gunning the engine and barely, if at all, stopping at the stop signs, rendering useless any semblance of traffic calming and safety.

I have only lived in the village since 2016, but I am aware that there have been multiple committees formed by the residents here to get something done so our streets are safe and speed limits are observed.

Nobody likes speed bumps – they are a pain, particularly when going over 20km/h, but that is the point.

People use the village to cut through from Guelph line to 29; that makes sense as it can be slow to go down to 25 or up to 7. The thing is that there is another cut through route using Indian Trail where the limit is 60 for a good part of it. That road has a much less dense residential population and is a much better option than coming through the village with its curves and turns and stop signs.

We really need a win/win here.  I pay more taxes on my small Eden Mills property than I did on my home near Christie Pits in Toronto.  I think it is reasonable that I should be able to take a walk in the evening along streets posted at 40km/h and not have to be frightened and disturbed by drivers breaking the law.

The residents of Eden Mills have gone to great lengths to offer corroborating data and ask for help with this. We are not asking for bylaws to be changed or roads to be changed or speed limits lowered. We are simply asking that we get some help with the enforcement of the current speed limit imposed  for very reasonable reasons.

I really should be able to walk the streets of this lovely village I live in with out fearing for my safety or enduring the juvenile antics of reckless drivers who take advantage of this rural community.

Please find a solution.

Yana Hoffman,
Eden Mills

 

Taxes not the solution

Dear Editor:

Climate change is said to be an important issue for most Canadians in this election campaign.

It appears that Canada’s federal parties have all settled on imposing taxes on Canadians as being the way to save the world from climate change, but these taxes will have to be a lot higher to get people to stop using fossil fuels. Why are alternatives not being discussed?

One Conservative candidate used the term “climate lockdown” but was forced to remove it. I think this is an interesting idea. Gerry Walsh advised us in her letter last week to stop buying useless items. This is a good idea as most of them come from China, where they do not have the strict pollution standards we have and the items have to be shipped a long distance using fossil fuels.

However, this would not be as helpful as a climate lockdown that would ground airplanes which certainly do use massive amounts of fossil fuel. Most people using air travel don’t need to. I equate air travel to the useless items we shouldn’t buy. There are no passenger airplanes that don’t use fossil fuel so there is no alternative, hence the need for a climate lockdown if we are to save the world from man-made climate change.

There has not been much uptake for a ban on unnecessary air travel. That would kill tourism and Canadians love their winter vacations in the sun. We know from the COVID-19 lockdowns that grounding airplanes greatly reduced carbon emissions. Since then people are back to flying and the CO2 is spewing again. It makes me wonder if people really believe in the imminent catastrophic climate change that is preached to us daily.

They appear to be satisfied with the application of plastic Band-Aids to fix an open, blood-gushing wound. Perhaps they know subconsciously there is something wrong with the whole scenario but don’t want to rock the boat or even study the matter because the “experts” talk them down. Will taxes save the Earth from CO2 which, by the way, is good for growing plants? Unlikely.

Jane Vandervliet,
Erin

 

‘Not only in America’

Dear Editor:

RE: Hatred and vitriol, Sept. 2

Harvey Thomson’s letter states that “hatred, vitriol, bullying and intimidation” should have no place in a Canadian election campaign. He further states that he would expect this from right-wing extreme followers of Donald Trump.

I agree wholeheartedly. There should be no violence and harm caused to humans or animals and no vandalism to property.

This brought to mind a news story a few years back just after Trump defeated Hillary Clinton in the American presidential election. The story described how a female student was sitting in a cafeteria at Guelph University and she was punched in the head, knocking her to the ground. Her crime? She was wearing a Trump “Make America Great Again” cap.

On the university’s Facebook page, a lot of posts appeared to agree with the assault, with posts like “good, she deserved it.” The student explained that her family had just moved from the States and her father supported Trump from a business and economics point of view.

Some of the people I was “debating” politics with appeared to have the same attitude. I then issued a challenge to them. I offered to wear a “I voted Hillary” T-shirt and they wear a red Trump hat. Just for a short period of time. Maybe, one week. No one responded, but the reasons they gave were amazingly creative. Now, if I was a mean, nasty person, I would have concluded they were all liars and/or cowards. But, I’m a reasonably kind person; I have been told. So I tried really hard not to make a judgement.

When one group of people regards themselves as intellectually and morally superior to another, it’s easier for the baser instincts of human nature to take over. Phrases like “clinging to their Bible and guns,” “basket of deplorables” and “smelly Walmart shoppers” are not conducive to a healthy, civilized debate. But it’s easy to blame America. Trouble is, it’s not only in America.

Jury Klymko,
Rockwood

 

Three election issues

Dear Editor:

With the elections around the corner (pretty bad timing, if you ask me), I would like to appeal to all the candidates in the area. You are guaranteed my vote if your party can wholeheartedly commit to only these three items:

– smaller government. We seem to be getting top-heavy. Dissolve the Senate as well as the Governor Generals’ position, for starters;

– rewrite the Income Tax Act. Put it on a diet, and then limit its future amendments so that it can’t be used for buying votes; and

– abolish all First Nations treaties and the Indian Act. We are all Canadian, either by heritage or by assimilation. No one deserves special treatment anymore.

These three points are not meant to offend, but rather, to save the individual taxpayer scads of money, so that, eventually, we can all be proud to live in a country with a soaring surplus instead of a monstrous deficit.

Instead of always worrying about paying for recurring Reconciliation or those ridiculous interest payments on our soaring debt, we will be allowed to, as a country, focus on infrastructure, technological advancement and social stability (i.e. real progress). Hopefully this resonates with more folks.

Doug Vanderveen,
Centre Wellington