Cobourg Blog

When was the last time you got a traffic ticket for anything other than speeding?  Dangerous driving, failing to stop at a stop sign, illegal lane change, failing to keep right, going through a red light - these are all offences but police seem to have given up on enforcing them.  Why? I suspect because it’s much easier to prove speeding.  In addition, speeding is an arbitrary thing - I normally drive at 120 on the 401 but on a bad day last winter I was going 80 and being passed by others at 100 which was dangerous at the time.  This was proved by the fact that half an hour later, there was an accident in the same location.  Where were the police enforcing 100 as dangerous driving?  But I don’t blame them, who’d want to be driving in those conditions anyway!

And on a separate traffic issue, taking away the car for doing 150 km/H is against all principles of justice - convicted and sentenced by the police on the spot.  Something you’d expect in Zimbabwe but not Canada.

There is also the thought that Police rely on speeding tickets as a source of revenue and since they are easy to issue and easy to prove, it’s a more productive way of earning money for the force.  It’s not the fault of individual police officers but of the direction they get from the board and the budgets they get given. The Police board should be directing the chief to deploy the traffic police to chase all offences - not just speeding.

Unfortunately for Cobourg and Port Hope, our Police Forces do NOT have this problem - they spend little time on ANY traffic enforcement - I am really commenting about the OPP.  But we could do with some Police traffic enforcement in Cobourg on Division, Elgin and William streets where most people travel in the left lane for the whole distance instead of keeping to the right.  Bad driving and illegal too.

If the OPP can’t get their priorities right, maybe we are right to keep Policing local.  From the survey on this site, it seems most people want to amalgamate Port Hope and Cobourg forces.

Gordon Gilchrist got into trouble a while ago for saying what we all know - that some immigrants are not good for Canada. My view is that if you come to Canada, then your first step is to learn how Canadians do things - that is, learn the Canadian Culture. If you don’t like it, go home. If there are things from your own culture that fit in, then by all means continue with them. I came from Australia in 1973 and stayed because I liked Canada - and now, I don’t want to lose all the good things that Canada has. I brought with me the Australian attitude of a “fair go” for everyone - but it fits right into Canadian values.

I did not think I had any right to bring all my family. But if I had brought them because they were potential assets and I promised to support them, I would have expected to be held to that promise (currently such promises have no meaning). I also feel that the laws of Canada apply to me and not Australia’s laws. Likewise, if I had religious beliefs that conflicted with Canada’s laws, then Canada’s laws would have over-ridden. And the biggest of all, I want 100% equal rights for all women - they are not chattels like extreme Muslims would have us believe.  When it came time to become a citizen, I was quite happy to accept whatever rules Canada saw fit to make.

I like to think that these attitudes go with being a “good immigrant”.

But many immigrants (but by no means all) come from cultures that don’t agree with me. They want to change Canada, they want to stay isolated and not blend in, they want privileges that Canadians don’t have - in short they want their culture re-planted here. The worst of these is the culture of Islam as practiced by their extremists.

If we are not careful, this will destroy Canada as we know it. It nearly destroyed Denmark. Read this article written by Susan MacAllen. (Or access “The Danish Experience” at right under pages). And for more from “Ex-Muslims”, go to this site: www.islam-watch.org/.  Hopefully the rational Muslims will save the day but they need our encouragement if not more.

I’m getting tired of the assumption by many journalists and writers that if it’s a big company, it must be unhuman and somehow evil. The current cry is “Oil companies are conspiring to hose the consumer”. First, oil companies mostly have little or no effect on oil from the ground. It’s caused by market forces - perhaps hedge funds, perhaps Governments, perhaps OPEC but oil companies have no way to control prices in the short term (less than a few years).

But worse, the implication is that oil companies are run by immoral evil people! When I worked in a big company (not oil), everyone I knew was an ordinary ethical human being. Not one monster! Even CEOs, believe it or not were the same! There may be the occasional bad egg - but they are on average, the same as ordinary folks when it comes to their ethics. They typically go home to families, they typically go to a church, they read the same newspapers - so I have never seen the mythical evil CEO.

The other slant by many people is that big companies are evil but small companies are OK! At what point in the companies growth does the owner suddenly become evil? When can we define the company as BIG so it can be included with all the other big evil companies? Does the owner wake up one day and say to himself “My company is now big so I’ll throw all my ethics out the door!”. OK, so it would have to be gradual - so how do us plebs define a company as big and evil but another as not? Clearly my criticism is that many people are too quick with generalities about “big companies” or “big oil companies”. Very sloppy and misleading.

Having said all that, there is one thing that is way too common in big companies. And that is that CEO’s and other senior people get paid way too much money. No-one is worth more than $1M per year. The same goes for Hockey and Baseball players. Shame on shareholders for allowing such nonsense.

The Mill on Tremaine street certainly has an interesting history.  Started in 1846, it was a major employer in the area around 1900;  you can get more info here.  But it’s not clear to me that the building there now is the same one that housed the water powered mill since the original mill was “four and a half stories high”  (Cobourg Star, Jan 21, 1846).  There is no dispute that the Mill is of Historic interest - but that certainly does NOT mean that the building is of any interest at all and does not relate to anything about its architecture.

For buildings to be worth preserving they must be of architectural value and preferably not plain ugly (like this one).  In Cobourg, the coal piles on the waterfront were of major historical interest as were the railway lines and the “Diversey” building.  Fortunately LACAC stayed away from trying to protect these!

I thought that LACAC was charged with keeping Cobourg beautiful by helping to preserve old buildings - they are on the wrong track trying to preserve this Mill.  How about an effort to find a buyer for Sidbrook?  In the meantime, our council can help by refusing to designate the Mill as a Heritage property.

We all have our own opinions on Global warming and on the environment yet there seem to be constant battles between “Environmentalists” and the rest of the world.  Let me spell it out:

• Environmentalists do not want “dirty” power sources like coal burning generators yet they do not want clean hydro-electric power because of the damage to river valleys.
• Environmentalists don’t want coal burning generators yet they do not want clean nuclear generators because of concerns about waste disposal.
• Solar Power should be good, right?  Yet practical generators occupy desert land that might (e.g. in California) be home to an endangered species (e.g. a tortoise)!
• Oil tankers are bad from an environmental point of view - they might spill oil into the oceans - but pipelines are the subject of environmentalists’ protests.
• We “must not hunt the East coast Harp seals” - but meanwhile these seals help keep the fish population so low the environment is certainly suffering there - not to mention the fishermen.

Notice I am not choosing sides here - although I certainly have a viewpoint.  The problem I want to highlight is that Environmentalists rarely offer any real solutions - they only raise problems.  Or perhaps I should say, they only offer solutions that will not be accepted by the majority and are impractical.  There should be a rule followed by journalists that says if someone objects or complains about something, they must provide a workable solution.  Sometimes there are trade-offs - something relatively minor suffers for an overall benefit.

We can all agree that one day the earth will run out of non-renewable energy (e.g. oil) and will run out of mined commodities (again, oil but also copper, lithium etc) so we know the problem.  Solutions will not be without some type of environmental cost - let’s start talking about compromises and trade-offs and accept that perfect solutions are not going to happen.

Recently, Alma and I visited Bar Harbor, Maine and came across a wonderful walking path along their waterfront. It is far enough away from the water that it’s on private property yet the residents there are co-operating with the town so everyone has access. As you walk along the path, on one side is the magnificent view, on the other are the backyards of private homes. Without fences! And no apparent problems - although I suspect police would patrol to enforce “dawn to dusk”.

Below is the sign announcing this to visitors.

Why can’t we do this for Cobourg’s West Beach?

John Draper

Cobourg Blog now has a page where you can vote on current issues.  Names are not published. Currently, two questions are being asked - on the Rink and on the Police.  Click here.  The link is also accessible from the main page of Cobourg Internet and under “Pages” at right.  Only one vote is allowed per person on each subject.

On May 20, 2008, the unveiling of Canada’s first statue of one of its own poets took place at Queen’s Park, Toronto.

This was a long-time coming. During my tours of eastern Europe in the 80’s, I took note of all the streets, avenues, subway stations, blocks, parks, named after outstanding poets, writers, composers, etc. Then I would reflect on Canada, with streets, squares, schools, libraries named after local politicians or administrative bureaucraps – how incredibly uninspiring. These are the examples we want our young people to emulate? How Pleasantville!

Once in a while I bemoaned the fact that Canada was the only country in the world that celebrated foreign writers exclusively.

1. There is a statue of Longfellow in Nova Scotia,

2. Robbie Burns in Allan Gardens, Toronto,

3. Lesya Ukrainka statue

4. Taras Shevchenko statue in Oakville, Ont.,

5. the chrome-plated Shakespeare in Stratford

6. George Bernard Shaw in Niagara-On-the-Lake, Ontario,

7. Leo Tolstoy in the community of Doukhobors, British Columbia.

Immigrants arrived and planted their poets as a garden gesture, marking their cultural turf. I’m all fine with this – encourage it actually. However, it was the absence of home-grown cultural turf-marking that was disturbing. Where was Layton Lane or Atwood Avenue or Cohen Corners? Where was anything?

So finally, on May 20, after 141 years, Canada has marked its own cultural turf in Queens Park, Toronto, with a statue of one of Canada’s most outstanding and acclaimed poets, Al Purdy. It was my honour to have once shared a stage with him for a poetry reading in 1972 at Loyalist College of Applied Arts and Technology, Belleville, Ont.

Before the unveiling, it was Purdy’s ignominy to have been concealed by a white burqua, inadvertently referencing the dress code for Taliban high mucky-mullahs, but his dignity was restored when he was liberated to sunshine, moonshine and a resting place for unstool pigeons.

One of Purdy’s signature pieces was the all-Canadian conten/xt of his most enduring and endearing poems, AT THE QUINTE HOTEL. A memorable performance of the poem, utilizing Purdy’s own voice over merged well with Gordon Downing’s portrayal of Purdy can be found here.  This should be bookmarked into grade 10 literature curricula across Canada.

This brings me to a matter which is local to Cobourg. The honouring of Susanna Moodie. Click here to listen to a Historica 1 minute excerpt from Roughing It In the Bush. If you don’t know who Susanna Moodie is, and her relationship to Cobourg, then I suggest you catch up at Trent University’s site: Women Pioneers.
Prior to Moodie’s immigration to Canada in 1832, she had already become known for her anti-slavery writing in the UK. In Canada, they built their own log cabin, and their respect of the natives, is evident in Roughing it in the Bush (p. 28 v.2) where Susanna wrote: “… and as my husband never allowed them to eat with the servants, but brought them to his own table, they soon grew friendly and communicative…”

Susanna Moodie Park, and let Cobourg’s illuminati raise the funds for a plaque to be embedded on the grounds in her name, and bearing an inscription from her writing. Moodie would be an uplifting role model to emulate.

Contrast that with the dreary campaign to raise funds to have a depressing memorial to all the females who have been murdered or experienced unrelenting violence from males. This is a memorial from which children learn what males continually do to females. Gives a taste of ashes in my mouth. This unrelenting memorialisation to reinforce the dominance of victimhood as the prevailing zeitgeist needs to slow down.

Moodie was a strong literate woman. It was no small feat to arrive at the docks with luggage and begin a new life, build a home, and amid the hardships, write Roughing it In the Bush. I would much prefer that our children emulate those who took full responsibility for their success. This is memorial where I could take my son or daughter and both would leave uplifted. Why would I take my son or daughter to a memorial for beaten women if the result is shame and humiliation to the esteem of one gender?

Valerie MacDonald (Cobourg Star) reports today that: “The Town of Cobourg is starting work next week on its artificial ice rink project in Rotary Waterfront Park after providing information requested by the environment ministry, says public works director Stephen Peacock.”  First note there is no mention of the fountain - I think that idea has gone away - it’s now just a concrete pad used for a winter rink - and too small for adults at that.  Martin Partridge’s submission to MOE has apparently been dismissed although a comprehensive response is promised.

And objections to the attempted delay by Martin include the statement by Don Ubell that “the transit shelter and accessible washroom are an intricate part of the artificial ice rink project and Mr. Martin has done a ‘disservice to the community’ by continuing to try and delay it”.  We’re spending $1.5M to get a washroom and bus shelter!!  If there are answers to all the objections raised, why is it impossible for the council to give public answers?

The biggest event of Cobourg’s year - the Waterfront Festival - has now passed.  Some rain on Saturday and Sunday tested the organization and it passed.  The entertainment was great - even though weather cancelled the Skyhawks and rescue display.  The Toronto Police Motorcycles on Friday were a big hit - a neat addition. Another creative addition was the 1812 re-enactment by high school students - hopefully this will also be an annual event. The crowds were great through the weekend and on Tuesday, Mother Nature provided the best Canada Day weather you could want.  The Parade on Canada Day was not up to the usual Cobourg standard - apart from the always fantastic Cobourg Concert band with a police officer on a Segway leading the way.

The only fly in the ointment was the Legion Beer tent.  Police were called to stop a fight; Bob Spooner threatened to shorten the hours and a letter to the editor today compained about the raucous Rock Bands.  But I have a question:  Why does the Legion have a beer tent there anyway?  We know the Legion is mostly a drinking place - it long ago lost its connection with our military.  They do not have any of their entertainers mentioned in the Festival program or the web site.  They don’t seem to contribute anything to the Festival. In fact the Festival is organized by the Lions, Rotary and the Town.  No mention of the Legion.  Do they even pay rent for their tent space?  Why are they there at all?  They don’t fit the rest of the Festival which is family, crafts and arts oriented.  If you want a beer, go to the Lion’s tent in Vic park.

Having said all that, the effect on the Condo owners should not be a factor - they know this Festival is put on every year - so they must “bear with it”.  But Condos or no, the Legion Beer tent does not fit with the rest of the Festival.  Let’s hope it disappears next year - a sign “Legion this Way” should be enough - it’s only a short walk away.