Dear Editor:
RE: Obviously out of step, June 24.
“What makes you say that?” As a teacher, I would use this question to have my students support what they were saying.
While reading Dave Adsett’s editorial on the St. David St. reconstruction, my mind often asked that very question. What evidence does he have to say the things he said? I would need a weekly column for a year to address all the holes, biases, and misleading use of information presented in the editorial.
It’s a pity that the platform of having an editorial does not elevate the debate of what constitutes a happy and healthy community. A debate, I would argue, we need. Instead, it divides us, much like Highway 6 physically divides us, by putting us in various camps with narrow self-interests (cyclists, business owners, planners, councillors, car owners, etc.). We are all citizens of Centre Wellington. Period.
Adsett needs to elevate the discussion by asking questions that reflect a broader understanding of the issues and how those issues affect our citizens? The concerns Adsett highlighted in his editorial were about cost, parking, and congestion. Did he consider the following? What is the cost of speeding? What is the cost of mitigating global warming? What is the cost of dealing with our health crisis? What do the experts say is the best way to deal with parking?
The same can be asked of congestion. Research the concept of “induced demand.” The research is surprising. When it comes to getting what I wished for, it is far from it. I wish we would discuss issues facing our community with openness to information and understanding that our citizens can handle the nuances of a good discussion.
Also, I have a wish to have a healthier and happier community for future generations. However, wishing it will not make it happen. Building a better future requires action as well as debate. So, let’s build this future based on research and not worn-out antiquated views with little to no backing.
John Scott,
Elora