Letters: January 14

Re: Open letter to Scott Reid (Jan. 7, 2010), Francis MacDonald

Re: Open letter to Scott Reid MP (Jan. 7, 2010)

Congratulations to Helen Forsey. She has accomplished in a simple “Letter to the editor” what my wife (among others) has been trying to achieve for years … I am speechless! I have never read such a dishonest, self-incriminating and intellectually incoherent letter and honestly don’t know where to start.

Helen takes issue with a “Christmas card” she received from her local MP Scott Reid, complaining that it wasn’t “inclusive” (Careful, Helen, some of your fellow constituents may not be Christian. Maybe you should show a little more couth than your MP and refer to it as a “holiday card” in the spirit of inclusiveness) while in the same paragraph describing herself as a “political opponent”. How “partisan” - especially during the holidays!

Helen’s letter should offend the sensibility of any reader with a lukewarm I.Q. but I would simply like to address the two “flagrant falsehoods” Helen proposes in her letter.

Firstly, her suggestion that the “Bloc” was not part of the coalition government as Scott Reid claimed is patently false. Without the support of the “Bloc” the coalition would not have been able to form an alternative government; therefore, while Helen and those of her ilk may want to split hairs over whether the “Bloc” would have been part of the coalition party, they were certainly “party to the party”. This is beyond dispute.

Secondly, Helen appears to be the one attempting to play on the “gullibility of many Canadians” when she notes that most Canadians voted against the Conservatives; while her math is indisputable (if you apply it as she directs), her logic is certainly questionable. Helen must have offended scores of die-hard Liberals as well as ardent NDP supporters by suggesting that any vote cast for either party was merely a reactionary vote against the Conservative party. However, if we apply Helen’s logic, then a vote for the Liberals is a vote against the NDP, etc.

I’ve taken the liberty of computing voter intent as per Helen’s direction, excluding the Bloc, who, according to her, was never part of the coalition to begin with. Conservatives garnered 37.6%, Liberals 26.2% and NDP 18.2%; therefore while 44.4% voted against the Conservatives, 55.8% voted against Liberals and 63.8% against the NDP.

I personally found it amusing that the Liberals didn’t “lose confidence” in the Conservative Government back in 2006 when they finished a mere 6.1% behind the Conservatives on election day, but after the 2008 election found them 11.4% back (presumably Canadian voters had lost confidence in the Liberals), they chose to form an unlikely alliance with the NDP.

I suggest that if the Liberals and the NDP can find such common ground, they should amalgamate prior to the next election rather than waiting until sagging poll numbers make it the most politically expedient choice, and that Helen Forsey call the MP’s office and request to be removed from their mailing list.

Francis MacDonald

Disgusted Taxpayer

Why are the citizens living in the southern part of Addington Highlands second class citizens?

Not only do we have no water or sewer, no mail delivery, and no garbage or recycling pick up for waterfront properties that pay the highest taxes in the township, some of us don't even have a properly maintained road.

Responses like the one I recently received from the reeve, “You chose to live here” are all I get.

When we bought our property on the Hughes Landing Road in 1999 the road was a well-maintained crown road. It was like the “401 with gravel”.

By 2001 the road conditions had deteriorated, potholes were more abundant and the shoulders were only being graded periodically.

By 2004 a petition was presented to Council by six full-time residents and 100 others asking for better maintenance because the road had become so bad. A roads study found that it was the worst road in the township. One week later the road was done properly. But that was the only time.

In 2005 the road was brought up to standard, but it began to deteriorate almost immediately because it was not being maintained properly. In 2006 the first mile of the road was surface treated, and in 2008 Hughes Landing road to the causeway was upgraded.

When we asked when the rest of the road, another 4.5 kilometres, would be done, we were told by the reeve, “We just spent over $1,000,000 on that road, don't ask for anything more.”

Well, there are 28 full-time residents living on the second part of that road. And when the work was done on the first part the shoulders after the causeway were never widened, even when all the blasted rock was available.

Why is the second half of Hughes Landing Road such a low priority? When Hughes Landing Road was called the “worst in the township”, it was the whole road, not the first half.

In 2007 the Matawatchan Road in the north end of the township was surface treated, but in 2009 the townships applied for and received a grant to upgrade the Matawatchan Road again. The grant was for over $1 million to rebuild a road that had just been done two years earlier!

That project is already underway, and meanwhile when we complain even about grading and basic maintenance on Hughes Landing, we are told “there are other roads in worse shape.”

Are our tax dollars and government grants going where they really should? Why do we pay for Roads/Needs studies if they are not going to lead to anything?

Let's do one road at a time before starting to re-do another. Hartsmere, Ashby Lake, and Matatwatchan were completely done before any major roads in the south have been done, even though the population per kilometre is higher in the south.

This is an issue of fairness.

John Eggleton