(A Note from Niagara At Large publisher Doug Draper – As a hopelessly addicted newspaper reader, one of the first sections of any newspaper I turn to is the editorial section, and what I often check out first, even before I read the paper’s editorial opinions, are the letters to the editor.
To me, and as a columnist whose faults at least sometimes include being too wordy or long-winded, there is nothing I enjoy more than a letter to the editor that, in more than two or three paragraphs on an issue, just plain nails it.
Such is the case with the following letter to the editor, in my view, from the July 13, 2012 edition of The Globe and Mail, one of the last great daily newspaper left in Canada and, thankfully, not owned by Sun Media.
Without resorting to personal attacks or any gratuitous use of crude language, which too often pollute commentary these days – especially that posted on too many blog sites in the internet universe – this Letter to the Editor pins the tail on the perverbial donkey when it comes to Canada’s Harper government recently announceing plans to fund a scientific study on the possible health impacts of wind turbines on nearby residents, while at the same time ignoring or cutting research that might interfere with its ideological support for more punishment for law breakers, lowering the GST and expanding dirty oil/tar sand enterprizes at any cost to our rivers and lakes, to fish habitat and to air and other life-sustaining resources of this planet at large.
I am posting this column from the Globe below, hoping that the paper will accept my sincere plug for it and not come after me for reposting one of its letters to the editor. I may make ‘Letters To the Editor Worth Another Read’ a regular feature on this site if enough of you like it. You may even wish to share the odd letter to the editor you come across that you feel is worth another read. If so, punch it out, along with the paper it came from, the date it was published and the name and town for the individual who wrote the piece and send it to firstname.lastname@example.org .)
Referring to the government’s sudden interest in the possible health effects of wind turbines, Conservation MP Pierre Poiliervre says: “In all cases, science and facts should rule our decisions.”
Taking Mr. Polievre at his word, I rejoice that there will be no repetition in Ottawa of past evidence-free policy-making, such as lowering the GST (advice of economists ignored); abolishing the mandatory long-term census (avice of statisticians ingored); abolishing the mandatory sentencing and duration of incarceration (advice of statisticians ignored); restricing health care for refugee claimants (advice of the medical profession ignored); and closing the Experimental Lakes Area (advice of environmental scientists ignored). – Mark Bisby Ottawa (Ontario).