Letters to the editor

Stumble Upon

del.icio.us

Digg

Facebook

Print

Email

15 Comment(s)

Recently, Mayor Brad Woodside stated that he will not pressure the University of New Brunswick to conduct a comprehensive environmental assessment of its woodlot - 1,500 acres of which is slated for development over the coming years.

Enlarge Photo

This was surprising to me in light of the city's newly launched "Green Matters" campaign.

For a city aiming to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by six per cent by 2010, where is the logic in ripping out over 1,500 acres of forests which absorb incredible amounts of carbon dioxide?

Recently, there have been warnings from environmental experts, insurance bureaus and urban planners from across Canada that city planners must make whatever efforts they can to try to minimise the effects of climate change.

If our best natural defense against greenhouse gases, flooding and water shortages is mowed down and paved over, the "Green Matters" campaign becomes nothing but a publicity stunt - or a cruel joke.

That the city has been recently criticized nationally for its environmental hypocrisy should make it more, not less, willing to make the UNB woodlot its business. If city council's present development mindset is continued, Fredericton's motto (Fredericton - noble daughter of the forest) will become a thing of the past.

Frances Campbell

Fredericton

New Brunswick needs a cell phone users bill of rights

There are still no laws in place that would protect consumers from onerous payment requirements brought forth from conglomerates in the telecommunications industry.

In October 2005, I argued in Small Claims Court that New Brunswick needed a cell phone users bill of rights, legislation which would protect consumers from the unyielding authority of telecommunication giants who have no regard for the consumers they service.

The legislation would be similar to a bill brought forth in Massachusetts. It would create a commission that would monitor service quality, keep contracts less than a year, control add-on charges, and reduce or eliminate hefty termination fees for poor service.

In my case, the adjudicator declared "Although I have sympathy with the claimant and do believe there should be a cell phone users bill of rights, the defendant was acting within its legal right" to charge me cancellation fees because I terminated my service in an area which had extremely poor reception, but was in a residential boundary where reasonable service should have been received.

When I contacted Michael Jenkin, the Director General of Consumer Affairs, I was told to contact the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission. However on the CRTC website they acknowledge that "the CRTC does not regulate the rates, quality of service or business practices of cellular (wireless) service providers. Cellular telephone subscribers who have complaints about their service should contact their provider directly."

Contacting any cell phone service provider is useless, especially when they have consumers sign contracts written to the benefit of the service provider, which have exclusions for their benefit in the event of service interruptions or add-on charges.

Politicians have not considered consumer protection issues as a major concern to voters. With the recent actions by Telus and Aliant Mobility to charge consumers for incoming text messages which could include spam, will any of our politicians stand up for consumers and demand a cell phone users bill of rights?

I am waiting for the answer.

Stu Lyons

Dieppe, N.B.

Enough about Morgentaler

It's been more than two weeks since Dr. Henry Morgentaler was named to the Order of Canada.

Day in and day out, letters are printed full of unsubstantiated facts and outlandish comparisons. Morgentaler in the same realm as bin Laden? This is absurd!

I understand that the country may never be united on this issue; we are all entitled to believe what we wish and say how we feel, but enough already!

I get it. A lot of people don't like Morgentaler. Some people would give back the Order of Canada if they were ever to receive it. Some people think Morgentaler is a terrorist, similar to one who destroyed the lives of 3,000 people and their families, who launched us into a war which continues to kill our own - as well as countless others around the world. I get it.

A lot of people think Morgentaler will be judged in the afterlife and will pay for his sins. Fine. Believe what you will.

Personally, I have had enough and am ready to move on. Let the Lord deal with it if he will and stop forcing this skewed Christian propaganda on me.

Bailey White

Fredericton

Praying for a change of heart

It was with great sadness that I received the news that Henry Morgentaler was to receive my country's highest honour - the Order of Canada.

This man, a survivor of the Jewish Holocaust, has killed so many unborn babies. These babies are not even given a chance to breathe our Canadian air.

Women are not told the consequences of abortion - it's just a fix for the moment. Little do they realize they will be haunted by this choice, a decision so horrible they are unable to speak of it.

Fortunately, there is healing for those wounded women, and me too. They are reaching out in thanksgiving and relief for this healing and forgiveness from our God, who gives life and takes life in his infinite wisdom.

Monies made from abortions could be used to help families to have and care for children, and Canadian governments would not be worried about our declining population.

Everyday, we pray for Dr. Morgentaler, all abortionists and those who work with them to have a change of heart. We pray, too, that those in charge of naming people to the Order of Canada will have a change of heart.

May God's will be accomplished in Canada.

Joan Daley

Fredericton

Please Mr. Harper, step in to help Omar Khadr

This is an open letter to Stephen Harper.

How did it come to this? I must now plead with my government, beg them to honour the contract it holds with its citizens.

Omar Khadr was a child when he was forced by his parents to take up arms against a foreign force. Children do not choose to be soldiers. A child who fights in a war is a victim of that war, and for him, we must weep.

What did our government do for this boy, this child who it is their legal and moral duty to protect? Nothing.

Worse than nothing. They left him to rot in a US torture camp - a place that every country with a sane government has called an abomination and the presidential candidates have called an embarrassment.

This child, who has grown into a young man about my age, is hopeless.

Even if our government is finally shamed into lobbying for his return, what hope of healing his deep psychological wounds does he have? These are the questions every Canadian should be asking themselves.

What have we become that we could let this happen to a fellow human being, a child? I pray that you, Mr. Harper, think good and long about these questions when you look at your son.

Brandon Chavarie

Fredericton