Mail bag: 03/28/24

‘Never feel judged’

Dear Editor:

RE: Please reconsider, March 21. 

After reading Sue Mckenzie’s letter about parents whining over the lack of subsidized daycare, the voice inside me is determined to be heard. 

As a parent who works full time in emergency services (paramedic) in our local community, my job is difficult when it comes to family life as I work 12-hour shifts – nights, weekends and holidays. 

My husband also works out of the home and we require before- and after-school daycare during the school year, and full-day daycare during the summer months. 

But guess what, we are still both an active participant in raising our children and have been able to witness all of those “firsts”. On the many days we do get to spend together, we make the most out of it and make many wonderful family memories. My home daycare lady treats my children as her own and does not just do it for a pay cheque. And my children have made lifelong friendships with the other children they go to daycare with. It’s a win-win situation.

I have two boys ages 7 and 9 … what I should tell them when they are at the age to decide what they want to do with their life? If I understand Mckenzie’s point of view correctly, am I to give them a choice between going to school and preparing for a career or having children as they should stay home and care for them until they are of school age? Doing both is very much obtainable and accepted.

I feel no shame having a demanding career and yet, I am also blessed as a mother, loving and raising two beautiful boys. These boys get to see both a community role-model, learn that women have an equal and successful place in a male-dominated workforce and yet get to feel the love from a parent who places them beyond anything else. In my eyes, they are wining at life, in every way possible. 

For all the parents out there, make a choice that is best for you and your family. You should never feel judged for your decision. 

Marsha Sealey,
Elora

‘Cruel and ungodly’

Dear Editor:

RE: Please reconsider, March 21.

Well, thank you, Sue Mckenzie. You have shown me, so clearly, how cruel and ungodly it is to judge others whose circumstances I have not experienced. 

In the past, I too have been quick to pass judgment on others. 

Your letter has shown me what that looks like and I thank you for giving me the insight to do better in the future.

Barbara Gooch,
Elora

Stay home to raise kids

Dear Editor:

RE: Please reconsider, March 21. 

Sue Mckenzie hit the nail on the head. Stay home and raise your kids, especially if you want the healthiest kids for life. 

A Times study in 1999 concluded that the kids who do best in life are those who are with their mothers until age five – bar none. If affordability is an issue for you in supporting your children, then you need to alter your plans about having them. 

Again, Sue is right and I add to her suggestions: space your kids apart so you have only one with care needs at a time; work opposite shifts to reduce the number of hours a child needs care; and give up your toys and indulgences. 

There should never be an established “right” to daycare as was suggested by Victoria Mountain (People deserve better, March 21). That “right” is basically you reaching into my pocket for tax dollars in order to support your lifestyle choices. 

The weeping, wailing and gnashing of teeth over not procuring daycare means those demonstrating this manipulative tactic need to take responsibility for themselves. Ridding the country of this ill-thought-out program would be in the best interest of everyone. Alternatively, give the subsidy directly to the parent(s) and tax the income received. 

The additional level of bureaucracy to administer this program doubles the cost of the benefit being administered. What a colossal waste of money and allowance of reneging on responsibility.

Joy Lippai,
Arthur

For the kids, grandkids

Dear Editor:

Premier Doug Ford is expanding fossil gas infrastructure in Ontario, and with Bill 165, racing to overturn the Ontario Energy Board’s sane and rational decision to stop Enbridge from subsidizing fossil gas expansions into new communities, paid for by its existing customers. 

In a climate crisis, this is lunacy, especially when there are many far greener alternatives. New homes using fossil gas for heating and cooling will also increase Ontario’s greenhouse gas emissions at a time when they need to come down sharply.    

This spring and summer, we will bite our nails watching wildfires, floods and tornadoes rip through our most treasured natural resources, our forests. We will wring our hands seeing flood waters contaminate many homes, washing away people’s hopes and dreams, and our hearts will break for them. We will be numb with loss and sadness. The climate crisis looks far too big for any of us to make a difference.  

Are we the country that continually looks back and sighs? Will we, as unsuspecting citizens, allow big corporate interests to take over because they suggest and want us to believe we will be left in the cold and dark if we give up our addiction to fossil fuels? 

No one who is advocating for clean energy wants or expects that outcome! We know a better tomorrow is possible but only if we stop burning the fossil fuels that are heating up and wrecking our planet  and our children’s future.   

Let’s look to the past and the courage of people who weathered the Great Depression and two world wars. They were willing to endure extreme deprivations, often putting their lives on the line, to make us safe and free from tyranny. What will we do to bring in a new era of clean energy, water and air for all future generations?  

I hope Bill 165 disintegrates under scrutiny and never passes the Ontario legislature. Let’s instead move forward with heating and cooling with super-efficient heat pumps and solar panels to power them, in a far cleaner, greener environment that makes our lives – and our children’s lives – better in every way. 

An anonymous person wrote: “The only emotion greater than fear is hope. And the only way you can feel hope is if you take action.” 

I urge you to join me in fighting Bill 165, and let’s work together to build the cleanest, greenest communities we can for the sake of our kids and grandchildren. 

Gerry Walsh,
Erin

What’s the difference?

Dear Editor:

RE: Time to ‘axe’ Ford? (March 21).

Apart from other statements in his letter that I would take issue with, Ron Moore has repeated Justin Trudeau’s misleading claim that “For 80% of us, the carbon tax rebate puts as much or more money back into our pockets than it takes out in carbon tax”.

According to independent, non-partisan Parliamentary Budget Officer Yves Giroux, who examined the carbon tax last year, “When both fiscal and economic impacts of the federal fuel charge are considered, we estimate that most households will see a net loss. Based on our analysis, most households will pay more in fuel charges and GST – as well as receiving slightly lower incomes – than they will receive in Climate Action Incentive payments.”

Giroux calculated that the average Ontario household’s net cost after rebates would be $627 in 2024, increasing to $1,820 by 2030, when the carbon tax increases to $170 per tonne.

Also, according to a study published by the Fraser Institute, a $170 carbon tax would shrink Canada’s economy by 1.8% and produce significant job losses and reduced real income in every province.

Even if the carbon tax had the desired effect of reducing Canada’s greenhouse gas emissions (I have seen no evidence that it has), what difference would that make? 

In 2021 Canada’s emissions comprised 1.5% of global GHG emissions compared to 26% for China (in 2018). And since 2005, emissions from China increased by 71.7%, as it continues to build more and more coal-fired power plants to meet demand for its products. 

It’s absurd to think that, even if Canada could drive its GHG emissions to zero, there would be any measurable impact on the global climate.

Henry Brunsveld,
Puslinch

‘Show us a plan’

Dear Editor:

This letter is a response to a recent Pierre Poilievre TV ad.

Canada is not a jigsaw puzzle! We are a huge land mass, home to 40,000,000 people, all of whom in some way have felt the effects of  climate change, whether it be exposure to drought, floods, fires, smoky air, the Arctic ice melt, or storms.

The tiny person who we see you helping to complete the puzzle must  represent our children, and their children, who will need to deal with the kind of future we have left to them.

We need you to complete the big picture, beyond the stale daily  wrangling in parliament, with proposed solutions to mitigate the threat of climate disasters tomorrow and in the future.  

Follow the example of one of your eminent predecessors. 

Show us a plan.

Arlene Callaghan,
Fergus

‘Man up’

Dear Editor:

RE: County politicians hesitant to declare intimate partner violence an ‘epidemic,’ March 21.

I’m wondering what kind of message the men on Wellington County council think is communicated to young men and boys in our community by not declaring intimate violence an epidemic. 

I wonder what message it sends to current and future perpetrators of intimate partner violence. I wonder what message it sends to women who have to spend countless months and years trying to manage the pain and trauma inflicted from those violent events. I wonder what message it sends to the children who are so innocently impacted by this implosion of their parent’s vital support.

As a father of a pre-teen daughter and partner to a wonderfully strong woman, as a county taxpayer and as a public servant myself, I find it incredibly short-sighted that these men are hesitating in the slightest.

Maybe their hesitation is because they’re secretly about to propose that Wellington County is not just going to declare the epidemic, but has already begun plans to build much needed shelters in all of our townships. 

Because, this problem isn’t going away. Not declaring it, not saying what it is, it only adds fuel to the fire. Man up! Be the leaders you were elected to be.

Christopher Jess,
Elora

Efficiencies?

Dear Editor:

RE: Source water protection committee raises alarm about proposal to end free private well testing, March 21.

Thank you for your article. It is oddly appropriate that on The Ides of March, and 24 years after the Walkerton tragedy, Doug Ford’s government is looking at another way to off us in the name of “efficiency.”

It is particularly shortsighted because, as noted by Daine Saxe, Ontario’s last environmental commissioner, there is a major gap in Ontario’s water protection policy in that private wells are monitored.

The proposal to discontinue free private well testing adds two impediments to maintaining safety of private wells: 

– the cost of well testing and need to find labs to do the tests; and

– removal of a convenient location for submitting water samples.

I understand that thousands of homes in the Halton region are on private wells and I suspect similar numbers would apply to the Grand River Source Water Protection Area and many other Ontario Source Water Protection Areas.

Please let your MPP know that “efficiencies” which could endanger public health are not acceptable.

Dave Rodgers,
Puslinch

Find a better location

Dear Editor:

RE: Recent letters from Toni Ellis (Conserve trees, March 7) and J. Alexander (Bad decision, Feb. 22).

Both of these issues apply to Centre Wellington council’s declaration of Strathallen park in Fergus as surplus. Putting a high school on this lot is not in anyone’s best interest. 

The issues of traffic congestion, unsuitable size to build all that a high school should provide (library, cafeteria, class rooms, parking and athletic fields) are all too true. If there is any sort of athletic field available, there will be practices and games and spectators. This increases the volume and length of times for an increase in traffic. The mayor declaring that residents can access the park after school hours and on weekends becomes less meaningful. 

To that point, there is a sign at the entrance to the current school forbidding use of Wellington Catholic District School Board  property from dusk to dawn without permission of the landowner. So to whom do we listen? I know this does not seem to be important, but consider what it represents. No complete analysis of the proposal. 

Another issue to consider is the loss of over two dozen trees. There are eight beautiful large trees separating the elementary school from the park land. There are also 16 or so “memorial trees” planted at the east end of the park. Green space lost and the benefit of all these trees should be considered.

Three schools within two blocks of an established residential area, loss of green space, loss of trees, major traffic congestion at the beginning and end of school hours, increased risk to students with that increase in numbers of cars and buses, and the list goes on. 

There must be a better, more suitable and appropriate location for this school.

Bernice Robinet,
Fergus

65k for a symposium?

Dear Editor:

RE: ‘We need to do things differently’: desire for housing plan voiced at health, housing symposium, March 21.

So $65,000 was spent to dive deep into housing? I could have saved them a lot of time and money – the answer they cannot afford it! But why does housing cost so much? 

If you keep asking why, you will eventually and pretty much always get to the root of the issue. Just throwing “housing” money to hold symposiums isn’t going to fix the issue, but alas our councillors tell us it’s all covered by the feds! What a relief for us taxpayers … wait, where does the federal government get its money? 

“Well, you’re just lucky to have housing and health and stuff,” I hear them say. Well yeah, I am super lucky to get up every day and be away from my family to work long hours to afford it. I am so lucky to have 20 to 30 per cent in taxes taken from those pay cheques. That’s money that could have improved mine and my family’s life. So lucky. 

You know what, maybe I will throw 65k at a symposium that will fix the problem.

Garrett Vanheeswyk,
Wellington North

Making a difference

Dear Editor:

Re: Communities for people, March 21.

Yes, communities are for people, and there is an opportunity right in Fergus, right now, for those looking for support around affordable housing. 

Habitat for Humanity is building 32 units (stacked townhomes) on Garafraxa Street West, 22 of which  are dedicated to families looking to get into the housing market, along with Habitat’s support. The other 10 units are now for sale on MLS. 

With reference to the 22 units designated for Habitat families, I believe there are many in our community not familiar with the new Habitat financial model. Firstly, Habitat has stepped up to the plate to create solutions for affordable housing, rather than just talk and plan about it. Secondly, Habitat has introduced an affordable mortgage program to assist families to make that important and goal-worthy step of making homeownership a reality. It’s a game changer to help our community move forward on the gap of affordable housing. 

If you, or a family member or neighbour is looking for assistance, reach out to Habitat for Humanity.  

If you are a concerned community member, Habitat is in the process of launching an offering of community bonds, which provide you, as a socially responsible individual or company, a way to help by investing in these bonds. Funds invested go directly toward more developments Habitat is planning. 

Habitat for Humanity has taken a leadership role in addressing affordable housing. With our support, we all can be proud to know we are doing something to make a difference. 

Ed Gleeson,
Fergus

Beliefs not shared

Dear Editor:

RE: No Bibles? (March 7).

In this letter reader Vic Palmer asks “ is it too much to ask that each branch (of the Wellington County Public Library) have a physical copy  of the Bible available for viewing by walk-in readers”?

I’d answer this question in the affirmative. Yes, it is too much to ask. 

This is a public library, not a church reading room. Do you think other groups in our community have an equal right to representation of their beliefs on the shelves of our neighborhood libraries? 

Surely if we provide Christians with their Bible, we have an equal obligation to provide Muslims with the Quran, Jews with the Talmud, and non-believers like myself with their own books. 

Your religious beliefs are not shared by everyone in our community. Unless you want to provide reading materials that give voice to all of our belief systems, it seems presumptuous to single out one religious viewpoint for our public libraries as if it were somehow superior or universal.

Believe me, it is neither.

Hank Davis,
Puslinch

No one to teach Ford?

Dear Editor:

Let us assume that Ford gets his troupe of like minded friends appointed as new provincial judges, etc.  

I’d assume that any defence lawyer on the losing end of one of their possibly-incorrect decisions would be appealing to the next highest court in milliseconds. This would cause more delays and increased costs to us, the taxpayers.  

Is there anyone who could teach Ford to avoid these poorly thought-out decisions before they are acted on?

Gregg Derrett,
Guelph

Conscience guides us

Dear Editor:

RE: Protecting children? (March 7).

Well, John Mifsud, and anyone else with that anti-Christian bias (hate has no home here), I’m not willing to give Christians the sole claim to the customs, precepts and morals that have established and govern our culture today. 

It’s not only Christians who believe there are things that are anti-productive to society, or just plain wrong. 

The only reason I can think of that anyone would not want to limit access to internet pornography for underage children would be that it would limit the anonymity of the adults accessing those sites as well. 

It’s simple: if you would be ashamed of others knowing you are on those sites, like your parents/spouse/kids etc., then you have the principles to know you shouldn’t be there. 

The Ten Commandments seem like a pretty good set of guidelines for a successful society to me, regardless of whether we got them from a higher authority or came to the conclusions from our own trial and error. 

The church might remind us, which you don’t seem to like, but it’s our conscience that guides us. 

We all know there are things that aren’t just wrong if you get caught. 

Paul Dunnill,
Fergus