LETTERS TO THE EDITOR
- September 26, 2006
Dear Editor;
After receiving the notice in the mail of the Town Square project, it has prompted me to write a few lines. It is with sad regret that our Council is still talking about the Cenotaph area for the town square. Do you people have no respect for our men and women who fought and some died for our country so we may have a place to live?
When they sacrificed their lives for us we should honour them with this small part of our town. This is the only thing left where people can come and remember. Every November 11th people of all ages and nationalities come to remember them.
There are other places in this town where a town centre could be:
1) Part of the old school ground next to the Princeton and District Community Skills Centre;
2) By the old hotel site where people could park at the Overwaitea and drug store lots. They will be close to shopping;
3) The old highway yard where there is a lot of room;
4) Chamber of Commerce area;
5) The Memorial Park where they already have a seating area and parking;
You talk about angle parking of the Cenotaph across from the Post Office. Have you ever thought about having this set up to check? At the present time with cars parked on both of the street it is not much room when the freight trucks bringing in supplies to many downtown businesses there is only enough room for them but with angle parking it will be very narrow, and you will be backing out into traffic.
You will also be taking away the parking for the stores and Doctors office on Vermilion Street.
Please think this over as we do not want to ruin our respect for our heroes.
I would like to thank you for letting me put my views in your paper, hoping others will do the same.
- Eleanor Sinclair, Princeton
Editor,
In view of the enormous divergence of public opinion concerning the Corren Agreement, it may be that the Ministry of Education has inadvertently created an atmosphere that will add to tensions rather than diffuse them.
Peter and Murray Corren apparently believe they need the agreement to gain respect, tolerance and acceptance in our province. At the same time, many parents are anxious because they fear their children may be confused and even damaged by possible gay and lesbian indoctrination.
One of the primary difficulties of the Settlement Agreement, at least in my view, is that it was arrived at by undemocratic means. It speaks of a desire for inclusion. But they have not included parents in the consultative process. Is this inclusion? The agreement says diversity is important. But only two gay men were permitted to participate. Is this diversity? They want equality and respect for all learners, but learners and their parents were not invited or permitted to participate. Is this equality and respect?
Certainly the stated objectives of the agreement are laudable and most of us would likely approve without reserve. However, if we pay careful attention to the wording, we might conclude that this is simply a weak response to the complaints of two strategically savvy activists.
Repeatedly, the agreement states that the Correns will be consulted. For example, "the respondent (i.e. Ministry of Education) will provide the amended draft policy and the draft letter to the complainants (the Correns) for their review. The complainants will provide their comments..."
At another point the agreement states "the respondent will consult with the complainant in preparing the guidelines."
When the process is flawed, we must expect that the outcome will also be flawed. In this instance the Ministry is giving rights to a minority by taking them away from the majority.
Andrew Holota, editor of the Surrey Leader recently observed that, "gay tolerance is good and necessary, as long as political correctness doesn't push this to the point where we have two individuals telling all parents what their children are going to learn, like it or not. That's beyond the limit."
I have no argument with the Correns for striving and agitating on behalf of a cause about which they are passionate. That right is essential in a democracy.
For democracy to function effectively however, those we elect must strive to ensure that minorities, and also the majority, feel protected and appreciated.
The present 'experiment' with our children is not inclusive nor does it take into account the wonderful diversity of our province. It pits people against each other. Further, it denigrates our democracy by failing to consider the sentiments of a substantial number of citizens. Surely we can do better.
Art Martens, Abbotsford
