Mail bag: 10/05/23

Lucas a ‘gentle giant’

Dear Editor:

The media has begun to release some of the horrific details of the accident that killed my son Lucas (Shortreed) and the Halliburtons’ actions for the years that followed. I can tell you we were shocked, sickened and in tears as we sat in the court listening to the extent of their deceit, audacity, selfishness and complete disregard for the community and the police services.

We would all love to punish the Halliburtons as we see fit but we have morals. We need to move on and not waste anymore of our precious time and energy. We have to accept we cannot change the past and we cannot change the Halliburtons.

Leading up to the Thanksgiving weekend and the 15th anniversary of Lucas’s death, in the spirit of Lucas, we ask you to have the courage to make some changes…

If you know who provided information to arrest the Halliburtons – acknowledge them as our heroes.

If you ever wrongfully accused anyone in this matter, please apologize.

Donate to MADD (Mothers Against Drunk Driving) – alcohol does kill.

Lucas loved his cats – cuddle a cat. Lucas was a gentle giant that loved to eat – donate to a food bank.

Lucas loved his grandmother, especially baking and canning peaches with her – visit or take time to remember your grandparents.

 Lucas volunteered at Wellington Terrace helping seniors plant flowers – visit a senior, plant some spring bulbs.

Lucas has a memorial ginkgo tree growing near Wellington Terrace – plant a tree or a shrub.

Lucas tried growing lemon trees from seeds, which led to lemons being used to obtain donations for his memorial tree fund – smell a lemon.

Lucas was known for his big bear-like hugs – hug someone.

Enjoy your freedom – take just a little more pleasure in choosing what you want to eat, sleeping in your own bed, having a window to look out, knowing you can go anywhere at any time you want.

We have the wisdom, let’s make a difference.

Judie Moore,
Centre Wellington

‘Static overwhelming’

Dear Editor:

Like many Canadians, I’m listening for the truth. But all the static is overwhelming.

Blank cheque statements like “Bring it home” just confuse me. I don’t  know what “it” is.

“Axe the tax” is even more problematic. Don’t we have a system that enables us to share the responsibility for maintaining our national  infrastructure? How else would it be paid for?

Where, may I ask, is some policy plan that I can evaluate?

Am I hearing an echo of “Let’s make America great again”? A slogan  used by an ersatz presidential candidate south of us.

I will keep on listening and hoping.

Arlene Callaghan,
Fergus

‘Earnest and heartfelt’

Dear Editor:

RE: ‘Support the weakest,’ Sept. 28.

I feel compelled to respond to a letter by Pat Woode, since my name was brought up. The mere mention by the author of being against MAID (medical assistance in dying)or compassionate euthanasia “for any reason” bespeaks the control and domination impulses of the protestors.

This rigid and unyielding, “my way or the highway” type of thinking has resulted in great social upheaval, as well as familial anguish in a neighbouring country. What sane and sentient Canadian would want these things replicated here? 

Even as I write this, the anti-MAID group alluded to by Pat Woode is marshalling its forces via a private member’s bill designed to thwart the right of those suffering mental illness from accessing MAID, due to become law in March of 2024. 

There is both a weariness and a consternation that one of the most basic tenets of civilized behaviour cannot be observed by the anti-MAID faction: please honour my wishes and I will honour yours; please respect my values and I will respond likewise. 

People accessing MAID have an earnest and heartfelt desire to be free of their egregious suffering and to depart this life with a semblance of their personal, human dignity intact. Why can’t some people understand this?

Allan Berry,
Fergus

Budget ‘will hurt kids’

Dear Editor:

Ford’s new budget will hurt students. No matter how you look at the numbers, the Ford government is letting schools fall further behind.

School boards across Ontario have been clear: cutting pandemic education funding will mean less support for kids that need it. Ford’s budget cuts that funding by nearly $1 billion, even though the pandemic’s impacts are still being felt in our schools. 

Now more than ever, we all know keeping up with inflation should be the bare minimum. But next school year, the Ford government’s public education spending won’t even come close. In fact, they’re over $1.5 billion short.

It doesn’t have to be this way.

This year, the Ford government has $20.6 billion in extra revenue. They’re spending $8 billion on corporate tax cuts and subsidies. If Ford valued public education, he would have made the investments our kids and their schools need.

We need, more then ever to invest in the future of our schools. 

At the end of the day, Ford’s budget will hurt kids.

Jeannie Monaghan,
Guelph

Deserved better

Dear Editor:

There was a total lack of national TV coverage of the important game between Canada’s and Jamaica’s women’s soccer teams on Sept. 26.

Shame on Sportsnet and TSN for not showing the game between the Canadian and Jamaican women’s teams at all. Between the two networks they have over a dozen channels. Surely one of those channels could have been used to show the soldout game?  

Instead it is only available on expensive specialty channels (some based in the U.S.) offering live streaming.

Canadian networks owe these women better.

Gregg Derrett,
Guelph

Work for your money

Dear Editor:

I made a trip by car to Brampton recently. In the city, at almost every traffic light stop, I was accosted or observed an individual walking down the line of stopped cars with a hand out and a container to receive money from the drivers of the vehicles.

These beggars are a danger to the traffic and a danger to themselves. I believe the truly unfortunate need societal support, but when I consider these beggars in light of the social benefits now doled out to almost any claimant who says he or she has an inability to work, I am angry firstly because individuals receiving government money without warrant jeopardize the system for those truly in need and secondly, it is simple theft from me, the taxpayer.

As a licensed advocate who fought for benefits for declined claimants, I have become quite cynical in accepting that all those who declare “disability” are entitled to social support. Most of these people approaching cars for cash are fully capable of doing labour and earning his or her keep – that is apparent by the fact that they can walk back and forth for long periods of time, stand in one place for hours, speak to strangers without reserve and approach the public uninhibited. 

However, we have become a society that enables laziness, entitlement and fraud. We have allowed claims for psychological injury such as PTSD, which is over- and mis-diagnosed and fraudulently presented, to justify allowing individuals to become lazy, unmotivated and entitled.

The best antidote to mental difficulties is to get busy – work and your mind will be taken off your troubles (you will also acquire a sense of pride in your accomplishments and validation as a contributing member of society).

The first step to curtailing this begging paradigm is for municipalities to put in place bylaws that make this type of activity illegal – for safety sake, and so that perhaps some of these beggars will get the message that there is no free ride. 

The second step is to stop enabling those who wish to spend their days in an inebriated haze with free drugs and all attending conveniences unless they commit to rehabilitation.

And the third step is to revise all our benefit systems in a way that only those who are truly incapacitated and unable to perform any type of work are provided a benefit. Everyone else gets to work for his or her money. There should be shame in begging bucks from car to car: not tolerant antipathy from those subjected to this behaviour because there is no choice but to obey the traffic signs.

Joy Lippai,
Arthur

It could happen to you

Dear Editor:

About 87% of the delegates at the recent Conservative Party convention voted to support a plan to demand single-sex spaces that are only open to women, with a definition of women as a “female person.”

The policy is intended to keep transgender and other gender-diverse people out of women’s prisons, shelters, locker rooms and washrooms. Forcing a transgender woman to use men’s spaces will likely trigger symptoms of gender dysphoria, causing them mental and emotional harm and could potentially lead to  verbal harassment or injury from physical retaliation from others.

Perhaps the answer is to set policies that control environments instead of people. For example, creating locker rooms with individual showers and changing spaces that are enclosed so that no one is able to see or judge anyone else’s naked body. We also have to think about the consequences of creating a term like “female person” and then using it to exclude services to individuals either within the confines of this policy or by applying it to other governmental or public services. If we allow this we will be creating a void without services for individuals who do not easily fit within the Conservatives’ definitions of  “female person” or “male person”.

If you think this does not really matter, because you don’t know any transgender or other gender diverse individuals, please remember that what you are willing to stand by and watch be done to someone else could also be done to you.

Joanne Mitchell,
Fergus

‘Concerned parents’

Dear Editor:

“A dark moment in Canadian history”, is what is being said regarding the recent 1 Million March 4 Children protests recently in Ottawa and in other cities across the nation.

“A dark moment in Canadian history”? Yeah, I don’t think so.

Concerned parents sharing their feelings shouldn’t be put down by the likes of biased leaders such as our prime minister or his comrade Jagmeet Singh.

So, while they and many of their MPs joined forces with counter protesters, they criticized and disparaged what opposition Leader Pierre Poilievre had to say. 

In response to Justin Trudeau’s comments, Poilievre snapped back with a message in support of the parents, stating there is no reason our children should be taught anything that goes against the will of their parents, and that Trudeau needs to “butt out”.

Susannah Sinclair,
Fergus