The Citizen, 1995-04-26, Page 4The North Huron
itizen CNA eNA
C
P.O. Box 429, P.O. Box 152,
BLYTH, Ont. BRUSSELS, Ont.
NOM 1H0 NOG 1110
Phone 523-4792 Phone 887-9114
FAX 523-9140 FAX 887-9021
Publisher, Keith Roulston
Editor, Bonnie Gropp
Sales Representatives,
Jeannette McNeil and Julie Mitchell
The Citizen is published weakly In Brussels, Ontario by North Huron Publishing
Company Inc.
Subscriptions are payable in advance at a rate of 523.00/year ($21.50 plus $1.50
G.S.T.) for local; $33.00/year ($30.85 plus $2.15 G.S.T.) for local letter carrier In
Goderich, Hanover, Listowel, etc. and out-of-area (40 miles from Brussels);
$62.00/year for U.S.A. and Foreign.
Advertising is accepted on the condition that in the event of a typographical error,
only that portion of the advertisement will be credited.
Advertising Deadlines: Monday, 2 p.m. - Brussels; Monday, 4 p.m. - Blyth.
We are not responsible for unsolicited newscripts or photographs.
Contents of The Citizen are 0 Copyright.
Publications Mail Registration No. 6968
Spring blooms
Photo by Jeannette McNeil
MPP Klopp responds
to 'Citizen' editorial
PAGE 4. THE CITIZEN, WEDNESDAY, APRIL 26, 1995.
Freedom brings responsibility
Freedom brings responsibility and the other side of free speech
brings is that we must be responsible in what we say. Long before a
truckload of chemicals destroyed that U.S. government office in
Oklahoma City last week, an
equally explosive mixture of
words helped turn human
beings into monstrous killers.
Apparently the bombers
belong to an extremist group
that thinks government is evil. It's not much wonder that weak,
impressionable people can be convinced of this and be prepared to kill
to battle government given the constant torrent of right-wing, anti-
government hate that is spewed over the airwaves of the U.S. by talk
show hosts seeking big ratings and big money. Spin your dial across
the radio ban any night after dark and you can pick up stations where
callers are encouraged to say hateful things about their politicians,
about liberals, even against other races. U.S. President Bill Clinton, in
attacking these programs in the aftermath of the Oklahoma bombing,
may have been somewhat self-serving since the broadcasters are a
thorn in his side, but he is also right. Ironically, these right wingers
who preach personal responsibility and less government intervention,
don't think they must be personally responsible for what they say.
But extremist talk comes from all sides. The situation isn't helped
when politicians like Justice Minister Allan Rock jump on a tragedy
like the Oklahoma bombing to justify his own political agenda,
warning we are in danger of having the kind of arms build-up of the
Michigan militia if we don't support his bill (we already have
legislation in place to stop people legally buying assault weapons).
Neither is the situation helped by opponents of the bill who compare
the government to Nazi Germany in its efforts to control guns.
Everyone has a responsibility to exercise their freedom of speech
with discretion. Those of us in the media, speaking to thousands at a
time have a special need to say things in a reasoned, not a hateful way.
But if you're sitting around a table in the coffee shop, if you're visiting
a neighbour or chatting at lunch break at work, you must also be
responsible in what you say.
Freedom of speech should be used to attack issues, not individuals.
Freedom of speech is for reasoning, not promoting hate. — KR
The trap is set
A tremendous smugness has set in among the English Canadian
media over the apparent disarray in the separatist movement in Quebec.
"Is Separatism dead?" trumpets the cover of Maclean's. Television
panels keep coming back to the watering down of the referendum
question. We are almost gloating over the apparently easy victory.
Even the currency markets have reacted, pushing the dollar up.
But in complacency there is danger and the separatists may just
have stumbled onto the issue that will win them their goal of
independence for Quebec.
On the surface, victory over separatism does seem assured. People
in Quebec seem just as tired of the issue as the rest of us. The polls
show that if people could have the best of both worlds, sovereignty but
with all the rights of being Canadian, they would take it. That is what
Premier Jacques Parizeau and Bloc Quebecois leader Lucien Bouchard
are aiming for. But polls also show that if the assurance isn't there of
ties with Canada, people will vote down sovereignty.
The solution then, seems simple. Just tell Quebecers that if they vote
for sovereignty that Canada will not be interested in any kind of
association. People will then drop back to not supporting sovereignty.
But there lies the trap.
There has only been one time in history when polls showed that a
sovereignty referendum could have been won: after the Manitoba and
Newfoundland legislatures refused to ratify the Meech Lake Accord on
constitutional reform. Quebecers felt rejected by other Canadians and
were ready to strike back, to gamble their future for their pride.
(Endless TV replays of the infamous Quebec flag-stomping in
Brockville helped.)
We need greater skill from our political leaders, and greater restraint
on the part of each individual, than ever now. If the message can
quietly be delivered to Quebec voters that it is pie in the sky to suppose
Quebec can have all the good things of separation without losing
anything of Canada then separatism will indeed have been put back in
its cage for a few more years. If, however, someone blurts out
something that can be interpreted as a rejection of Quebec, we may just
have what we most fear, a "yes" vote for sovereignty.
The separatists have baited a trap. We must not be caught. — KR
Letters
THE EDITOR,
Thank you for allowing me a few
lines in The Citizen to publicly
recognize and thank the many adult
volunteers who contribute to
Brussels Public School.
From preparing hot dogs and
distributing pizza, to helping with
fund raising to working with the
individual students to improve
skills, to teaching curling, all of
these people are true GIVERS of
themselves. Most volunteer their
support to many other worthy
organizations and causes in
Brussels and the surrounding area.
Let us all salute these wonderful
people who show such a keen
interest in our community and
youth.
Sincerely,
David Kemp, Principal, BPS.
THE EDITOR,
We greatly appreciate the
Ontario Federation of Agriculture's
concern about the 4-H program.
However, we want to clarify that
the Ontario Ministry of
Agriculture, Food and Rural
Affairs is continuing its support of
the 4-H program through funding
and resources, albeit at a somewhat
reduced level, now and for the
foreseeable future.
In the current environment of
reductions in government funding,
we understand the Federation's
concern. The Ontario 4-H Council
is seeking additional funding to
supplement any shortfalls and to
enhance the 4-H program. To this
end, we have secured funding to
hire a fundraiser for a one-year
term.
We are very pleased that the
Huron OFA has offered to provide
strong, active staff support to the
4-H program. We will look to the
Federation and other 4-H
stakeholders for input in the
Ontario 4-H Program Plan For The
Future which is now in its draft
form.
If your readers require more
information on The Ontario 4-H
Program Plan For The Future,
please contact the Ontario 4-H
Council at 1-800-937-5161. Plan
drafts are also available at local
OMAFRA offices.
Karen Seymour
President, Ontario 4-H Council.
THE EDITOR,
I wish to respond to an editorial
of Publisher Keith Roulston which
was published some time ago in
The Citizen. Allegations have
frequently been made by the
Opposition that because of Bill 40
and successor rights, it will be
impossible to establish any short
line rail operations in the province.
Yet, it's important to point out
that - this government is not
abandoning rail service to
communities. CN (and to a lesser
extent CP) is. The federal
government, be it Tory or Liberal,
is coming in and ripping up parts of
the province's infrastructure. It is
very convenient for CN and their
political masters to try to pass the
blame on to the province; to try to
say that because of successor rights
rail service is threatened.
That said, here are the steps we
have taken to foster short line
development:
1) In consultation with other
ministries, we canvassed the
affected shippers as well as the
communities to determine the
impact of abandoned rail service.
We have assessed what alternatives
to rail exist and what the current
shipping needs of businesses are.
Most of the lines that CN and CP
are considering abandoning are, in
fact, not economically viable. In
part that is because CN in particular
has, in the words of one shipper,
actively de-marketed their lines.
They don't want the business and
they are making that clear to
potential shippers. Furthermore,
they allow their rail plant to
deteriorate in quality to the point
that no short line operator would be
interested in stepping in.
2) We found potential investors
for these lines. Ontario had to take
the leadership on this in the
absence of federal leadership.
Investors have made on-site
inspections, analyzed the present
and potential traffic, and have
expressed interest to CN in buying
a few of these lines. It should be
pointed out that CN, as the seller of
the asset, will make the final
determination as to who will
acquire the lines.
Meanwhile, we continue to meet
with investors on a regular basis.
3) We spoke to the unions. On
Sept. 8 we met with United
Transportation Union, Brotherhood
of Locomotive Engineers and
Brotherhood of Maintenance and
Way Employees. All of them are
willing to negotiate a new, single,
collective agreement with a short
line operator. This position was
confirmed both in writing and by
negotiating with an investor
interested in purchasing a line in
Southwestern Ontario. Two of the
unions have indicated agreement in
principle to draft collective
agreement on this line.
In Northern Ontario, the Graham
Subdivision between Thunder Bay
and Sioux Lookout has at least one
interested investor which has also
been told by the unions they are
ready to sit down and negotiate a
new, single collective agreement.
We have maintained regular
contact with the unions over the
last several months. They continue
to express their willingness to
negotiate with investors interested
Unions express
willingness
to negotiate
in short lines. Investors frequently
say they can turn a marginally
uneconomical line around with
flexibility and the unions are
prepared to negotiate that
flexibility.
Specific lines which have
generated most attention:
Canadian Agra in Kincardine -
Met with the company in February
1994 and they made it clear that
their concern was securing a steam
pricing agreement with Ontario
Hydro and not rail service. They
were specifically asked if the
development of a short line was not
also an issue that they wanted
addressed. They responded directly
and clearly at that meeting - no.
The company made a business
decision not to ship by rail. After
several months negotiation; we
successful brokered an agreement
between Hydro and Canadian Agra
on a steam pricing agreement.
The statement made by the
member from Wellington on
Tuesday, Nov. 1 was wrong. Jobs
Continued on page 5
E ditorial