BC Ferries versus fresh water ferries
I have today asked Premier Christy Clark and the ministry of transportation and infrastructure to comment on why the Marine Branch of the ministry offers “free rides” to 2.4 million passengers and 1.5 million vehicles annually on the 14 fresh water ferry routes in the province while fares continue to rise on the saltwater ferry system on the coast [“Fiscal fairness update,” January 8].
The ministry’s website states that these 14 fresh water ferry routes are an integral link in British Columbia’s transportation network. I wonder what they categorize the saltwater ferry fleet as?
The taxpayers of this province continue to absorb the costs of running these fresh water vessels along with the fuel surcharge. Seems to me that the people who use these fresh water ferries would not mind paying a token fee to use these transportation routes…say $2 per passenger and $10 per vehicle. By my calculations this would bring in approximately $19.8 million annually. Some of this fare revenue could be used to subsidize the coastal ferry costs (just a suggestion).
I have yet to hear from the premier’s office or the ministry. I would hope that I will soon. The days of “free rides” should be over for a select group of people on a select group of ferries.
I realize that this “horse has been flogged” before, but we must continue to remind people to continue to speak out and write letters to try and effect change. As well, people should consider this issue when they vote in the next election.
Allan Drummond
Skeena Street
More to the story
This is directed mainly to a probably well-intentioned individual (and other like-minded citizens) who, as I was biking down Alberni Street with my dog attached to an approved “American Springer” bike attachment, rolls down his vehicle window and yells at how cruel I was being.
It is strange and sad how mistaken perceptions evoke emotional and irrational responses that can occasionally yield tragic results.
To this individual it seemed as if I was dragging my dog down a steep hill on a very blustery and windy pre-dawn morning. As a matter of fact, I had dragged myself out of bed at 6 am and even though it was very windy and raining I didn’t feel right about denying my dog her customary run which I have been doing regularly every morning for the past decade. That was my perception, obviously very different from this driver’s.
At the moment he slowed down to yell at me, not only was I not dragging my dog but I was pressing down hard on the brakes because she was lunging ahead down the slope. This man’s actions scared her, startled me and we almost rolled down the rest of the slope in front of oncoming traffic [“Riding city streets against distraction,” April 10, 2013].
Most dogs, and mine especially, a very energetic American Eskimo, love to run and in fact they need to run in order to stay healthy. Mine is especially exuberant when it is cold or raining outside even though I am not. We run about eight kilometres every morning at 6 am before the traffic builds up, lit up like a Christmas tree, front and back. The American Springer attachment (people may wish to search this on the Internet) keeps both of us safe.
If you have a problem with someone’s actions, please stop and explain your feelings calmly and rationally without letting your emotions run away with you because maybe there is another side to the story and maybe you can avoid a needless tragedy.
Charles Macelli
Saskatchewan Avenue
Where will it end?
With reference to your leading article [“Court ponders assisted suicide case,” November 26] you omitted some facts. Suicide is defined as “self inflicted death” (Oxford Dictionary). The title “assisted suicide” is a contradiction in terms.
Euthanasia might well be coupled with abortion in the government’s desire to reduce the population. The real truth behind the issue is the desire for lower expenditure which sounds commendable until the expense is taken into account. Each aborted foetus is one less taxpayer. At the present rate of clinical terminations, who will pay for health care 18 years from now? What will the taxes be with millions removed from the tax rolls? How will teachers react to classes of 40-plus or 50-plus or more in all grades? The end results can be anticipated; social unrest and economy will be probably be the order of the day.
Every time humans have tried to interfere with nature, chaos has been the net result benefiting only a select few. Lowering the population through euthanasia and abortion is not the answer. Let the young live. One future day they might just save humanity.
We do not need to kill the elderly, the disfigured or the infirm. What they need is better care, dignity and respect at the end of life.
Frank Rigby
Brunswick Avenue
Dialogue open
I would like to commend the Peak for publishing the article “Court ponders assisted suicide case” on the front page Wednesday, November 26. I was proud that our small town paper would publish an article that dealt with such an important but contentious issue.
I was disappointed by the public’s response to the article. I hope that the Letters to the Editor in December 4 paper are not a representative sample of where Powell Riverites stand on this topic.
Statistics and rhetoric can be found everywhere, both pro and con. For those who are interested in the debate, Dying With Dignity has a great website that provides a different perspective.
It’s a very exciting time as pro-choice has new meaning when related to having some control over unbearable suffering for the terminally ill.
Hanna Verkerk-English
Padgett Road
