Show some respect
Dear Editor:
I trust the “town fathers” will not allow a repetition of the disgraceful display shown at last year’s Elora Remembrance Day Service.
Allowing traffic to pass through the town square past the cenotaph during the service which was attended by the public is inexcusable. It boggles the mind that the main street is closed to traffic on the weekends in the summer for tourists, yet the town square wasn’t closed for the Remembrance Day service, which honours those Veterans who have kept our country free. What a shame!
Mr. Kelly Linton, as mayor/warden, I believe you and your elected officials should ensure this is not repeated this year.
Lest we forget.
Bob Ford,
Elora
Break the cycle
Dear Editor:
RE: CWDHS student charged in assault that sent fellow student to hospital, Oct. 14.
Sexual and gender-based violence (SGBV) has been on the rise for many years and has gone unaddressed for far too long. Our society has adopted social norms that have led to this drastic increase of violence and now is the time that each and every one of us takes the responsibility to address this crisis.
The issue of SGBV is widespread and has been affecting targeted groups within their workplaces, schools, homes and all over their communities.
Many of us in the Centre Wellington area have become aware of a recent incident involving severe violence towards a transgender student at CWDHS. This horrific event has opened the eyes of many in our community and created awareness of the prevalence of SGBV even in a small town like ours.
It is important that we act on this issue now. We can not dismiss this event and avoid the problem because the problem is rooted in avoidance. We have avoided the issues of exclusion, discrimination, and microaggressions which only led us to more severe and violent attacks.
We must act now. School assemblies and newspaper articles are a good place to start, but that’s not going to cut it. We need to come together as a community and face this issue together. Talk to your kids, educate yourself, understand your personal prejudices and address them. This is an issue we all have to take responsibility for.
As a community let’s work together to educate the public, create more safe spaces for the LGBTQ+ community, enforce policies that have no tolerance for discrimination, and most importantly let’s break this cycle of avoiding issues until it’s too late.
Tina Marques,
Fergus
Parents responsible
Dear Editor:
RE: CWDHS student charged in assault that sent fellow student to hospital, Oct. 14.
Fergus is a small town, and as we know, news travels fast. So, when I heard of the assault at the high school, my first thought was, “who’s to blame?”
Could it be that the school resource officer was removed from duty? Or that the school had failed to educate students on the effects of bullying? Did the community fail to participate in “Pink Shirt Day,” leading students to believe that bullying isn’t a serious issue? My answer to these questions is, maybe. However, bullying has been around long before police presence in schools, anti-bullying education programs and Pink Shirt Day existed. Who is responsible for children that physically and emotionally abuse others? In my opinion, their parents.
I know that this may get people fired up and defensive, but we need to take responsibility for our children, including their actions. We need to be engaged in our children’s lives, know their friends, and understand how they treat others. We also must hold our children accountable for their actions and stop defending their poor behaviour.
According to a study that used systems theory to understand and respond to family influences on children’s bullying behaviour, parenting styles that expose children to aggression, hostility, lack of affection, neglect and marital conflict are closely linked to aggressive behaviour and bullying.
It is time for all parents to come together as a community to address bullying and keep our children safe.
Finally, as the famous quote reads, “It takes a village to raise a child” – this has never been as clear as it is today.
Stephanie DiPaolo,
Fergus
‘Iron curtain’ policy
Dear Editor:
RE: Centre Wellington staff to take another look at policies on mental health, public interactions, Oct. 21.
It is fair to say that few people enjoy or are comfortable with being unfairly or even fairly criticized, especially in public settings. It is also important that discourse among disagreeing parties should remain polite and respectful.
However, the attempted passage of the “Respectful Interactions Policy, And, Frivolous, Vexatious and Unreasonable Complaints Policy” at the meeting of the Centre Wellington council on Oct. 18 was a transparent and alarming attempt on the part of municipal staff and some councillors to deter and impede public discussion and engagement.
The idea that self-serving and subjective decisions by public staff regarding which discussions will be entertained and which will be ignored or suppressed is an affront to the fundamental principles of our democracy. The public is, after all, paying for their service and is entitled to express opinions regarding their actions. It is obvious that this proposed policy is directed at silencing specific individuals with whom discussions have been at times uncomfortable and perhaps irritating, but such conversations are a fundamental component of democracy.
On paper at least, free speech remains a right and a privilege in this country and that includes dialogue with those entrusted with management of public interests. The public must be genuinely solicited for comment and suggestions regarding municipal policies and spending of municipal funds, even if there is disagreement.
The alternative is authoritarianism, which this proposed policy is transparently a step towards. Given its unbridled scope, the proposed policy can only act to inhibit public input into municipal decision-making as ratepayers are forced to consider whether their opinions and views will be deemed acceptable and “reasonable”.
Having lived in a communist state I recognize far too well the thin edge of the totalitarian wedge. This is a policy better suited to an iron curtain regime than to Centre Wellington. It is appalling to me that such a policy would be recommended for passage and defeated by only a single vote.
That Mayor Kelly Linton, who is charged by his oath of office to uphold the interests of the citizens of Centre Wellington, voted in favour of such an obvious attempt to undermine the right and responsibility of public comment is shameful.
Bravo to the four councillors who had the integrity to stand against this ill-conceived and over-reaching attempt to censor public involvement in the governance of our municipality.
Jonathan Schmidt,
Centre Wellington
Nursing home problems
Dear Editor:
RE: Nursing home inspection reports reveal resident injury and verbal abuse, Oct. 7.
The Ministry of Long-Term Care inspected two Caressant Care facilities, and they discovered reports of injury and verbal abuse from the residents.
A report stated that a PSW attempted to transfer a resident on their own, when the resident’s care plan said that two additional staff members needed to be present to help. The resident lost their balance and needed to be lowered to the floor. The next day, the resident got transferred to a hospital and was diagnosed with an injury.
A different report mentioned a resident being on the receiving end of verbal and emotional abuse. The PSW mocked and belittled the resident they were caring for, and they were also rough with the care they provided.
While resident harm is a prominent issue, the caretakers can get abused as well. I have a friend who works in a retirement home, and she mentioned to me that her sister once was hit by a resident.
These facilities have taken a turn for the worse, and they don’t always treat residents with dignity and respect. Different homes have different facilities. Other articles I looked at told horror stories about the care that some residents received.
The government has seen these issues, and they are looking into the idea of the government running the homes.
A majority of said facilities are for-profit organizations so those running them may have intentions of squeezing every penny out of the business. That in turn, will put a strain on the individual homes, and that strain could filter out into the treatment of residents or caretakers. On the other hand, I have heard wonderful things about other homes, the staff is good and the residents are well taken care of. More often than not, these better homes are actually non-profit organizations.
The government has seen these issues, and they are looking into the idea of running the homes. They have looked into both sides of the story, and seen the joys and pains of working in retirement homes.
I feel that it is a good idea, I do worry that things could be good for a while, then potentially go wrong. There could be cuts to care, more strain put on residents and staff, or it could be a positive difference in homes. There could be better care, and there would be less burdens and strain put on the residents and staff.
It could go either way.
Danielle Westrik,
West Garafraxa
Mental health concerns
Dear Editor:
The state of mental health in Guelph and Centre Wellington is an increasing concern for Gen Z and late-born millennials.
As mental health awareness grows an influx of young adults are seeking treatment options, there are not enough facilities, trained staff, and the government is unprepared to handle the high demand.
Anti-stigma efforts have been successful in fighting for those who would otherwise be afraid, but the system has let us down once again with the consistent gaps in funding and accessibility.
Despite the courage it takes for one to seek help, their efforts go unseen and untreated as they are turned away at doors and exacerbate all their options.
It is no surprise that young adults are struggling with finances as we continue to live in an overcharged and underpaid world, so when it comes to our mental health costs and paying our rent or groceries we have to decide what gets priority that month. Beginning to accept that there is no shame in therapy and that self-care is widely encouraged is fantastic, but when therapy costs are so steep and accessibility to programs are limited it can seem like the world is set up to see you fail; an individual can only do so much before feeling completely defeated.
When those who don’t believe in mental health speak up against progress it invalidates the work we have been struggling to make, then through the ridicule and mocking that continues it sets everyone back and the cycle of ignorance continues. While we have to pay for therapy, it costs you nothing to be a decent human.
Anyone can advocate for your own, your friends, or your children’s mental health by showing continued support, raising awareness and correcting false stigma. Remember when there was a cry about how “our children are our future,” well now is the future and your children are struggling with their mental health.
Dayna Rooney,
Guelph
Hoping for ‘justice’
Dear Editor:
RE:” Developer greed, Sept. 23.
With reference to the letter from Eimear O’Neill and the subsequent attempt to defend his cause, from Aaron Ciancone (developer of the Cambridge Mill, and the Elora Mill and condominiums), on Sept. 30, I can certainly support O’Neill’s statements.
Having seen the manner in which the Cambridge Mill was changed, and hearing how distressed many locals are with these changes, I wanted to get some idea of what Landmark-Pearle was planning in Elora.
At this point the mill had been abandoned, almost four years after Landmark had purchased the building. Was the purpose of this delay to add to the “great disrepair” mentioned in his letter of defence? Two crude wire gates had been erected at the end of Mill Street, to prevent residents, from entering the mill car park when taking tourists to view our heritage river, the Grand, and the Tooth of Time.
I spoke to Ciancone for an hour or more: he proffered his plans, not listening to a request that it might be wise to get to know the village, and the people before making drastic changes. I spoke of the “fashionably shabby” look of well restored buildings, rather than glass and aluminium, as used in Cambridge, and questioned the proposed glass bridge, constructed for the sole purpose of permitting condominium owners to cross the river without using the public footbridge. It was of no avail.
Several years later, we have not only lost a pre-Confederation street, “given” to Landmark-Pearle by means of a strange trade-off, and a lop-sided vote by council, all without local consultation; we are forbidden by guards to even set foot in the mill car park to view the river and Tooth of Time; the old ruins of the Potter Factory and adjacent buildings have been yuppified, and once again not for use by the locals; the riverside footpath used by Elora residents on a daily basis for many years, has been deprived of a large number of healthy trees, and is closed to the public, and there is little parking available for residents and tourists.
The nightmare grows as time goes on with the noisy drilling into the Grand River bed, related to the Landmark-Pearle condominiums. These structures will shut out much of the light for streets behind them; the loss of the famous view downriver, from what was once Badley Bridge will also be marred by the questionable glass bridge.
The biggest insult of all is the “failure to consult” on the part of Landmark-Pearle, operating within the Haldemand Tract, and therefore bound to consult with the Haudenosaunee–Six Nations Lands and Resources Development Council, prior to any land development. This agreement is documented by the Supreme Court of Canada.
On two occasions during the last three years I have stated this in council chambers, only to be scoffed at by our mayor who said “we know nothing of this.”
Let us hope that justice will prevail.
Carol Williams,
Elora
Likes wide shoulders
Dear Editor:
Kudos to the municipality that recently repaved a section of the Arkell Road and had the foresight to include wide shoulders to safely accommodate cyclists travelling into or from Guelph.
I often use this road when travelling from Rockwood to Guelph. Previously the shoulders were breaking up or non-existent making cycling on this road precarious. Now the wide shoulders afford an increased margin of safety.
On behalf of all cyclists, thank you! It is my hope that other municipalities follow your example.
Bill Allen,
Rockwood