JAMES FORCES SPOTLIGHT ON CANCER OF CHILD ABUSE
If there is a blessing to be received from the life of Graham James it is this: As a garden-variety monster he committed a commonplace crime and received a typical sentence, but because of how and where he choose his prey, because of who his victims were and ultimately because of their courage in coming forward, James unwittingly gave spark to a rare maistream discussion in this country on the epidemic of sex assualt and child abuse and tohe related dysfunction of our criminal justice system.
Leave it to Canadians.
These are issues so depraved, so fathomless, we would dearly prefer not to think about them at all, thank your very much.It would take the sullying of our national sport to force us to sit up and take notice . So be it.
Last week James was committed for two years in prison for the long-term sexual abuse of teen hockey players under his charge.
Preceived as lenient, the sentence fueled outrage. The judge in the case has received death threats. The minister for public safety is calling on the Manitoba Justice Department to carefully its case for appeal.
That s all very understandable. Jame s crimes are among the worse we can imagine and two years is a woefully inadequate sentence.
Yet for the many survivors of sex abuse and assault in this country, and the police and prosecutors who investigate, it is pretty much another day at the office. Rape, incest and the violation of trust are generally followed up with a slap on the wrist.
Comparitively, a two year sentence for sex crimes can be thought severe.
Consider the following: The federal Justice Department tracked 2,854 cases of child sex exploitation in Canada (2002-03) while noting most of these crimes are never reported.
During the tracking period, conviction rates for child sex abuse, child prostitution and child pornography were 38.5%, among the lowest in adult court. Of those found guilty, more than half received probation or a conditional sentence.
Thanks to James, the nation is focused on the cancer that is child sex abuse like never before. It is an opportunity to take awareness and outrage and use them to force stiffer punishments for the guilty- and greater understanding of support of the innocent.
Wednesday, March 28, 2012
Tuesday, March 27, 2012
DON'T SAY YOU CAN'T....SAY YOU'LL TRY
Although I continue to try and find resolution with my municipality with regards to my issues with my property , I seem to get the same reply. The inability of resolving the issues without the court system. It really is to bad that people can not take responsibility and step up and make the right decision. Sad statement for our communities when even our municipal governments can not take the high ground. This is the latest answer to requesting my municipal government make things fair and even. A wise man that I know once said, don't say you can't.....just say you'll try. Another municipal letter full of BS, especially when my last request to speak in front of council was approved and then declined at the last minute. Still will not let me speak..............I wonder WHY??????????????
Ms. McTaggart,We have repeatedly reapomded to your demands, both through regular correspondance, emails, and telephone conversations. CAO Snell and Clerk Berfelz are Officers of the Municipality of North Perth, as such, they do not have a pecuniary interest in any of your issues. As, this is not a matter before the courts we do not have a lawyer or mediator assigned to a case that does not exist.All members of the general public have the opportunity to appear before open Council (there is criteria to be followed) to present any issue. This must be coordinated through the Clerk's department for the next available time slot.Regards,Mayor Behrns
Ms. McTaggart,We have repeatedly reapomded to your demands, both through regular correspondance, emails, and telephone conversations. CAO Snell and Clerk Berfelz are Officers of the Municipality of North Perth, as such, they do not have a pecuniary interest in any of your issues. As, this is not a matter before the courts we do not have a lawyer or mediator assigned to a case that does not exist.All members of the general public have the opportunity to appear before open Council (there is criteria to be followed) to present any issue. This must be coordinated through the Clerk's department for the next available time slot.Regards,Mayor Behrns
SOMETHING TO THINK ABOUT
As we grow up, we learn that even the one person that wasn' t supposed to ever let you down probably will. You will have your heart broken probably more than once and it' s harder every time. You' ll break hearts too, so remember how it felt when yours was broken. You' ll fight with your best friend. You' ll blame a new love for things an old one did. You' ll cry because time is passing too fast, and you' ll eventually lose someone love. So take too many pictures, laugh too much, and love like you 've never been hurt because every sixty seconds you spend upset is a minute of happiness you ll never get back.
DON T BE AFRAID THAT YOUR LIFE WILL END , BE AFRAID THAT IT WILL NEVER BEGIN
anonyous
DON T BE AFRAID THAT YOUR LIFE WILL END , BE AFRAID THAT IT WILL NEVER BEGIN
anonyous
STRATFORD TOURISM ALLIANCE HAS RATHER ODD SALES PITCH
ANOTHER POINT OF VIEW
BY JOHN KASTNER
THE STRATFORD BEACON HERALD
The role of the Stratford Tourism Alliance is to promote tourism and convince people near and far that this is a great place to visit.
The alliance is a partnership of the Stratford Shakespeare Festival, the City of Stratford and the city's tourism sector. This collaboration replaced Tourism Stratford, which had been a city department.
Bringing in the stakeholders as partners makes sense, but to suggest everyone is on the same page is a stretch. It s clear the partners are using more than one song book.
Case in point - the annual Stratford swan parade. The Tourism Alliance wanted to ramp up the event and bring in bleachers, more glitz, gimmicks and pomp and circumstance.
The City Beautification and Environmental Awareness Committee disagreed, a standoff ensued and the committee opted for the KIS approach ( Keep It Simple ), and so the swan parade will be a lot like it has been for the last 20 years.
Bagpipes, tons of people and swans.
Then, last SaturdayThe Beacon Herald published an article about sports tourism, and in the article Tourism Alliance executive director Eugene Zakreski made some statements that irked the City Centre Committee.
To paraphase, Zakreski was somewhat dismissive of sports tourism and said that the mandate of the Tourism Alliance was to go after clientele that is " looking to spend a good deal of money" and "willing to spend a higher price".
The City Centre Committee was so miffed it sent out a media release to counter Zakreski s remarks and pointed out that tourists who only buy a newspaper or coffee werre also very welcome.
Zakreski, whose job is to sell Stratford as a destination for touristss, also took a swipe at Stratford s inventory of resturants and hotels.
"I think sports tourism is an excellent opportunity, but we have our challenges in terms of infrastructure, particularly places to stay and places to eat," Zakreski was quoted as saying in the article.
Well, that's an odd thing to say for the guy who is supposed to be singing the praises of the city and especially its hospitality and tourism sector.
And if there aren' t enough hotel rooms, or resturants or the right kind of hotels and resturants, one assumes that good old fashioned capitalism would kick in.
If Zakreski and the Tourism Alliance were bringing so many people here that there really was no place to eat or no place to stay, hotels wouldn t be converted to seniors' homes and new resturants would be opening up to handle the crowds.
The tourism alliance should be less picky about the sort of tourists we attract and if it brings so many tourists, whether it be sports tourism or anything else, that new resturants open and hotels have to be built, so be it.
There are lots of different and successful sales pitches, but to imply we only want tourists who are not worried about price and that there is no room at the inn and not enough good place to eat is rather a new approach.
And not a very good one.
john.kastner@sunmedia.ca
BY JOHN KASTNER
THE STRATFORD BEACON HERALD
The role of the Stratford Tourism Alliance is to promote tourism and convince people near and far that this is a great place to visit.
The alliance is a partnership of the Stratford Shakespeare Festival, the City of Stratford and the city's tourism sector. This collaboration replaced Tourism Stratford, which had been a city department.
Bringing in the stakeholders as partners makes sense, but to suggest everyone is on the same page is a stretch. It s clear the partners are using more than one song book.
Case in point - the annual Stratford swan parade. The Tourism Alliance wanted to ramp up the event and bring in bleachers, more glitz, gimmicks and pomp and circumstance.
The City Beautification and Environmental Awareness Committee disagreed, a standoff ensued and the committee opted for the KIS approach ( Keep It Simple ), and so the swan parade will be a lot like it has been for the last 20 years.
Bagpipes, tons of people and swans.
Then, last SaturdayThe Beacon Herald published an article about sports tourism, and in the article Tourism Alliance executive director Eugene Zakreski made some statements that irked the City Centre Committee.
To paraphase, Zakreski was somewhat dismissive of sports tourism and said that the mandate of the Tourism Alliance was to go after clientele that is " looking to spend a good deal of money" and "willing to spend a higher price".
The City Centre Committee was so miffed it sent out a media release to counter Zakreski s remarks and pointed out that tourists who only buy a newspaper or coffee werre also very welcome.
Zakreski, whose job is to sell Stratford as a destination for touristss, also took a swipe at Stratford s inventory of resturants and hotels.
"I think sports tourism is an excellent opportunity, but we have our challenges in terms of infrastructure, particularly places to stay and places to eat," Zakreski was quoted as saying in the article.
Well, that's an odd thing to say for the guy who is supposed to be singing the praises of the city and especially its hospitality and tourism sector.
And if there aren' t enough hotel rooms, or resturants or the right kind of hotels and resturants, one assumes that good old fashioned capitalism would kick in.
If Zakreski and the Tourism Alliance were bringing so many people here that there really was no place to eat or no place to stay, hotels wouldn t be converted to seniors' homes and new resturants would be opening up to handle the crowds.
The tourism alliance should be less picky about the sort of tourists we attract and if it brings so many tourists, whether it be sports tourism or anything else, that new resturants open and hotels have to be built, so be it.
There are lots of different and successful sales pitches, but to imply we only want tourists who are not worried about price and that there is no room at the inn and not enough good place to eat is rather a new approach.
And not a very good one.
john.kastner@sunmedia.ca
Tuesday, March 20, 2012
PROPERTY RIGHTS DON'T COUNT IN NORTH PERTH
WITHOUT PREJUDICE
MARCH 17, 2012
FOR COUNCIL MARCH 19, 2012
TO THE COUNCIL OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF NORTH PERTH
RE: BY-LAW 32-3012
PLEASE BE ADVISED THAT I AM TOTALLY AGAINST THIS BY- LAW WHICH GIVES MUNICIPAL EMPLOYEES , MUNICIPAL BY LAW OFFICERS AND MUNICIPAL BUILDING INSPECTORS THE RIGHT TO ENTER ONTO PRIVATE PROPERTY. THE MUNICIPALITY IS STRETCHING IT'S AUTHORITY AND REALLY HAS NO AUTHOURITY TO PASS THIS BY LAW. THE RIGHT OF ENTRY UNDER THE PROPERTY STANDARDS LAW THROUGH THE BUILDING CODE IS TO PROTECT THE RIGHTS OF PROPERTY OWNERS AND THE MUNICIPALITY HAS NO RIGHT TO TAKE THAT AWAY. YOUR MUNICIPALITY ALREADY GOES AGAINST THIS RULE OF LAW AND HAS TRESPASSED ON MY PROPERTY MANY TIMES.
"THE ADOPTION OF THE SAID BY LAW WILL RELIEVE THE MUNICIPALITY FROM HARM AND LIABILITY"
AS A MUNICIPALITY YOU ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE ACTIONS OF YOUR EMPLOYEES AND YOU ARE JOINT AND SEVERABILY LIABLE FOR ANY OF THEIR ACTIONS WHILE WORKING FOR THE MUNICIPALITY. THIS IS NOT A LEGAL BY LAW THAT THE MUNICIPALITY CAN PASS OR LEGALLY ENFORCE AS IT INFRINGES ON PEOPLES RIGHTS TO THE QUIET ENJOYMENT OF THIER PROPERTY. THE COUNCIL OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF NORTH PERTH NEEDS TO DUE FURTHER RESEARCH ON THIS ISSUE AND DUE DILIGENCE BEFORE THIS BY LAW IS PASSED. MY COMPLAINT AGAINST THIS BY LAW IS TO BE GIVEN TO COUNCIL FOR CONSIDERATION FOR MONDAY MARCH 19 2012.
SHERRIE MCTAGGART
EXCERPTS FROM THE BY LAW THAT SHOULD MAKE EVERYONE QUESTION WHAT IS GOING ON IN NORTH PERTH AND WHO WANTED THIS BY-LAW AND WHY ?????
" A right of entry By-law allows for an officer/employee to enter onto private property for the purpose of inspection or collection of information. This By-law will blanket all municipal By-laws that have been adopted under the Municipal Act for example pools, sewer use By-law or control of dogs. This By-law is different from our Property Standards By-law and it's right of Entry. Right of Entry is only granted for Property Standards under the Building Code Act and only concerns that specific By-law. Without this By-law the municipality may be liable to tresspassing with the possbility of employees and officers being charged. The adoption of the said by-law will relieve the Municipality from harm and liabilty"
SOME of the highlights that again should concern North Perth residents.
Maximum fine for obstructing an employee of North Perth to follow this By-law is $100,000.00. Excessive I think.
"Officer" means a By-law Enforcement Office, Police Officer, Chief Fire Official or designate. Animal Control Officer, or all Municipality of North Perth employees including any agents or contractors working on behalf of the Municipality authorised by council to enforce a provision(s) of any Municipality of North Perth By-law, provincial satute or federal statute."
INSPECTION POWERS
FOR THE PURPOSE OF AN INSPECTION, AN OFFICER MAY:
- require the production for inspection of documents or things relevant to the inspection
-inspect and remove documents or things relevant to the inspection for the purpose of making copies
-require information from any person concerning a matter related to the inspection; and
-alone or in conjuction with a person possessing special or expert knowledge, make examination or take tests, samples or photographs necessary for the purpose of the inspection.
NO PERSON SHALL OBSTRUCT OR ATTEMPT TO OBSTRUCT ANY OFFICER OR OTHER PERSON WHO IS EXERCISING A POWER OR PERFORMING A DUTY UNDER THIS BY-LAW OR ANY OTHER MUNICIPALITY OF NORTH PERTH BY-LAW. Remember if you do you face a maximum fine of $100,000.00
ACTION ON MY COMPLAINT FROM THE COUNCIL MEETING LAST NIGHT
AS QUOTED FROM THE TOWN CLERK TODAY IN AN EMAIL
"THE BY-LAW WAS DISCUSSED IN GREAT LENGTH LAST EVENING. COUNCIL DID NOT PROCEED WITH THE BY-LAW AS PRESENTED.
COMMENTS OR QUESTION ARE ENCOURAGED
MARCH 17, 2012
FOR COUNCIL MARCH 19, 2012
TO THE COUNCIL OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF NORTH PERTH
RE: BY-LAW 32-3012
PLEASE BE ADVISED THAT I AM TOTALLY AGAINST THIS BY- LAW WHICH GIVES MUNICIPAL EMPLOYEES , MUNICIPAL BY LAW OFFICERS AND MUNICIPAL BUILDING INSPECTORS THE RIGHT TO ENTER ONTO PRIVATE PROPERTY. THE MUNICIPALITY IS STRETCHING IT'S AUTHORITY AND REALLY HAS NO AUTHOURITY TO PASS THIS BY LAW. THE RIGHT OF ENTRY UNDER THE PROPERTY STANDARDS LAW THROUGH THE BUILDING CODE IS TO PROTECT THE RIGHTS OF PROPERTY OWNERS AND THE MUNICIPALITY HAS NO RIGHT TO TAKE THAT AWAY. YOUR MUNICIPALITY ALREADY GOES AGAINST THIS RULE OF LAW AND HAS TRESPASSED ON MY PROPERTY MANY TIMES.
"THE ADOPTION OF THE SAID BY LAW WILL RELIEVE THE MUNICIPALITY FROM HARM AND LIABILITY"
AS A MUNICIPALITY YOU ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE ACTIONS OF YOUR EMPLOYEES AND YOU ARE JOINT AND SEVERABILY LIABLE FOR ANY OF THEIR ACTIONS WHILE WORKING FOR THE MUNICIPALITY. THIS IS NOT A LEGAL BY LAW THAT THE MUNICIPALITY CAN PASS OR LEGALLY ENFORCE AS IT INFRINGES ON PEOPLES RIGHTS TO THE QUIET ENJOYMENT OF THIER PROPERTY. THE COUNCIL OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF NORTH PERTH NEEDS TO DUE FURTHER RESEARCH ON THIS ISSUE AND DUE DILIGENCE BEFORE THIS BY LAW IS PASSED. MY COMPLAINT AGAINST THIS BY LAW IS TO BE GIVEN TO COUNCIL FOR CONSIDERATION FOR MONDAY MARCH 19 2012.
SHERRIE MCTAGGART
EXCERPTS FROM THE BY LAW THAT SHOULD MAKE EVERYONE QUESTION WHAT IS GOING ON IN NORTH PERTH AND WHO WANTED THIS BY-LAW AND WHY ?????
" A right of entry By-law allows for an officer/employee to enter onto private property for the purpose of inspection or collection of information. This By-law will blanket all municipal By-laws that have been adopted under the Municipal Act for example pools, sewer use By-law or control of dogs. This By-law is different from our Property Standards By-law and it's right of Entry. Right of Entry is only granted for Property Standards under the Building Code Act and only concerns that specific By-law. Without this By-law the municipality may be liable to tresspassing with the possbility of employees and officers being charged. The adoption of the said by-law will relieve the Municipality from harm and liabilty"
SOME of the highlights that again should concern North Perth residents.
Maximum fine for obstructing an employee of North Perth to follow this By-law is $100,000.00. Excessive I think.
"Officer" means a By-law Enforcement Office, Police Officer, Chief Fire Official or designate. Animal Control Officer, or all Municipality of North Perth employees including any agents or contractors working on behalf of the Municipality authorised by council to enforce a provision(s) of any Municipality of North Perth By-law, provincial satute or federal statute."
INSPECTION POWERS
FOR THE PURPOSE OF AN INSPECTION, AN OFFICER MAY:
- require the production for inspection of documents or things relevant to the inspection
-inspect and remove documents or things relevant to the inspection for the purpose of making copies
-require information from any person concerning a matter related to the inspection; and
-alone or in conjuction with a person possessing special or expert knowledge, make examination or take tests, samples or photographs necessary for the purpose of the inspection.
NO PERSON SHALL OBSTRUCT OR ATTEMPT TO OBSTRUCT ANY OFFICER OR OTHER PERSON WHO IS EXERCISING A POWER OR PERFORMING A DUTY UNDER THIS BY-LAW OR ANY OTHER MUNICIPALITY OF NORTH PERTH BY-LAW. Remember if you do you face a maximum fine of $100,000.00
ACTION ON MY COMPLAINT FROM THE COUNCIL MEETING LAST NIGHT
AS QUOTED FROM THE TOWN CLERK TODAY IN AN EMAIL
"THE BY-LAW WAS DISCUSSED IN GREAT LENGTH LAST EVENING. COUNCIL DID NOT PROCEED WITH THE BY-LAW AS PRESENTED.
COMMENTS OR QUESTION ARE ENCOURAGED
Saturday, March 17, 2012
MOMENT OF SILENCE
IN MEMORY OF OUR FALLEN HEREOS
KEN REA AND RAY WALTER
OUR THOUGHTS AND PRAYERS ARE WITH THEIR FAMILIES AND ALL OUR NORTH PERTH FIREFIGHTERS NOW AND ALWAYS
Thursday, March 15, 2012
ANOTHER GREAT ARTICLE BY JOHN KASTNER FROM THE STRATFORD BEACON HERALD
FOR OUR MPP, BOSS'S ORDERS TRUMPED NEEDS OF RIDING
Try to imagine how Perth-Wellington MPP Randy Pettapiece could, in good conscience, stand in the legislature last week and vote against Bill 11.
That bill, if passed, would see $80 million delivered to southwestern Ontario to help this area bounce back from the last economic downturn.
The idea of giving this area a hand was the braintrust of mayors from Stratford to Windsor who could not understand why other economically pummelled regions could get help from the province but this area couldn't.
With tens of thousands of manufacturing jobs gone- from places like Ford Talbotville to Fram in Stratford- southwestern Ontario mayors said something had to be done.
So, with Stratford Mayor Dan Mathieson as chairman, they banded together and made a collective pitch to the province. Their cry for help led to Premier Dalton McGuinty annoucing $20 million in each of the next four years for the Southwestern Ontario Development fund. (SWODF)
Getting that fund created was no small feat and is testament to co-operation between mayors and the province.
Unmoved, following orders from leader Tim Hudak, Pettapiece and the other Conservative MPPs voted against the bill.
Pettapiece rationalized the no vote by saying he wasn t convinced the money would help and went on to say, "Quite frankly, we can t afford it, he said, citing the Drummond report."
Well that' s a bit odd because in the same week Pettapiece again did what his boss told him to do and supported a Conservative motion regarding the Toronto Transit Commission. Hudak and the Conservatives want the province to build subways and above-ground transit for the City of Toronto.
The cost: $8.4 billion.
So we can't afford $80 million to help this riding, but $8,4 billion for the TTC is ok.
Let' s be clear. In fairness to Pettapiece, this nonsense at Queen' s Park is all about party politics
The Conservatives voted against the government, but Bill 11 passed second reading, so the money is still on track. And insisting that the province build subways and not above- and below- ground transit is pandering to Toronto Mayor Rob Ford, who is fighting his own fight with Toronto city council.
Pettapiece, as a new MPP, has no choice but to do what his boss says and vote the way he is told. Being forced to follow party lines is not a new phenomenon either.
Regardless, what happened last week was a bad couple of days for politcs in general and this riding in particular.
And the whole notion of "I will go to Queen s Park and fight for this riding" rings a bit hollow now.
Try to imagine how Perth-Wellington MPP Randy Pettapiece could, in good conscience, stand in the legislature last week and vote against Bill 11.
That bill, if passed, would see $80 million delivered to southwestern Ontario to help this area bounce back from the last economic downturn.
The idea of giving this area a hand was the braintrust of mayors from Stratford to Windsor who could not understand why other economically pummelled regions could get help from the province but this area couldn't.
With tens of thousands of manufacturing jobs gone- from places like Ford Talbotville to Fram in Stratford- southwestern Ontario mayors said something had to be done.
So, with Stratford Mayor Dan Mathieson as chairman, they banded together and made a collective pitch to the province. Their cry for help led to Premier Dalton McGuinty annoucing $20 million in each of the next four years for the Southwestern Ontario Development fund. (SWODF)
Getting that fund created was no small feat and is testament to co-operation between mayors and the province.
Unmoved, following orders from leader Tim Hudak, Pettapiece and the other Conservative MPPs voted against the bill.
Pettapiece rationalized the no vote by saying he wasn t convinced the money would help and went on to say, "Quite frankly, we can t afford it, he said, citing the Drummond report."
Well that' s a bit odd because in the same week Pettapiece again did what his boss told him to do and supported a Conservative motion regarding the Toronto Transit Commission. Hudak and the Conservatives want the province to build subways and above-ground transit for the City of Toronto.
The cost: $8.4 billion.
So we can't afford $80 million to help this riding, but $8,4 billion for the TTC is ok.
Let' s be clear. In fairness to Pettapiece, this nonsense at Queen' s Park is all about party politics
The Conservatives voted against the government, but Bill 11 passed second reading, so the money is still on track. And insisting that the province build subways and not above- and below- ground transit is pandering to Toronto Mayor Rob Ford, who is fighting his own fight with Toronto city council.
Pettapiece, as a new MPP, has no choice but to do what his boss says and vote the way he is told. Being forced to follow party lines is not a new phenomenon either.
Regardless, what happened last week was a bad couple of days for politcs in general and this riding in particular.
And the whole notion of "I will go to Queen s Park and fight for this riding" rings a bit hollow now.
Sunday, March 11, 2012
SOMETHING TO THINK ABOUT
GRANT ME THE SERENITY TO ACCEPT THE THINGS I CANNOT CHANGE
THE COURAGE TO CHANGE THE THINGS I CANNOT ACCEPT
AND THE WISDOM TO HIDE THE BODIES OF THOSE PEOPLE
I HAD TO KILL TODAY BECAUSE THEY PISSED ME OFF
AND ALSO, HELP ME TO BE CAREFUL OF THE TOES I STEP ON TODAY
AS THEY MAY BE ATTACHED TO THE BUTT THAT I HAVE TO KISS TOMORROW
HELP ME TO ALWAYS GIVE 100% AT WORK.....12% ON MONDAY, 23% ON TUESDAY, 40% ON WEDNESDAY, 20% ON THRUSDAY, AND 5% ON FRIDAY
AND HELP ME TO REMEMBER............
WHEN I AM HAVING A REALLY BAD DAY
AND IT SEEMS THAT PEOPLE ARE TRYING TO PISS ME OFF
THAT IT TAKES 42 MUSCLES TO FROWN
AND ONLY 4 TO EXTEND MY MIDDLE FINGER AND TELL THEM TO BITE ME
THE COURAGE TO CHANGE THE THINGS I CANNOT ACCEPT
AND THE WISDOM TO HIDE THE BODIES OF THOSE PEOPLE
I HAD TO KILL TODAY BECAUSE THEY PISSED ME OFF
AND ALSO, HELP ME TO BE CAREFUL OF THE TOES I STEP ON TODAY
AS THEY MAY BE ATTACHED TO THE BUTT THAT I HAVE TO KISS TOMORROW
HELP ME TO ALWAYS GIVE 100% AT WORK.....12% ON MONDAY, 23% ON TUESDAY, 40% ON WEDNESDAY, 20% ON THRUSDAY, AND 5% ON FRIDAY
AND HELP ME TO REMEMBER............
WHEN I AM HAVING A REALLY BAD DAY
AND IT SEEMS THAT PEOPLE ARE TRYING TO PISS ME OFF
THAT IT TAKES 42 MUSCLES TO FROWN
AND ONLY 4 TO EXTEND MY MIDDLE FINGER AND TELL THEM TO BITE ME
Wednesday, March 7, 2012
WIND ENERGY ISSUE IN ATWOOD
I just love this man writing..........enjoy the read
DON'T EXPECT THE WIND TO BLOW BOTH WAYS AT MEETING
A week from tonight there will be a big meeting at the community centre in Atwood to talk about wind energy.
If you are one of those people sitting on the fence when it comes to wind energy and are seeking impartial, unbiased objective data when it comes to windmills, this might not be the place for you. Let's be honest, the place is going to packed with wind energy opponents.
The "public town hall " meeting has been called by Perth-Wellington MPP Randy Pettapiece who was elected primarily because of votes in rural areas of the riding where there is a significant anti-wind energy sentiment.
His positon on wind energy has been clear from the outset.
"When it comes to wind turbines, the McGuinty government has not been serious about consulting the public", Pettapiece said in a press release announcing the meeting.
"If they won't, we will.
Huron-Bruce MPP Lisa Thompson will also speak at the meeting. She is the Conservatives' critic charged with leading the opposition to the Liberals' Green Energy Act.
Nippissing MPP Vic Fedeli will also be at the meeting. He is the Tories critic for energy.
Talk about preaching to the choir.
Those opposed to wind energy have done a good job of organizing and there are citizens groups opposed to turbines in Perth East, West perth, NorthPerth and Huron East.
But there are pro-wind people out there.
There are farmers that have agreed to wind mills on their property. There are companies that are in the wind energy business and there are apparently way more studies that say wind energy is safe than there are that say it's a legitimate health risk, but they are drowned out by the wind opponents.
It's all well and good and politcally astute for the Conservatives to galvanize the wind opposition in this part of the country.
But no one, including the Conservatives, if they are honest, expects to hear both sides of the wind energy issue in Atwood.
Just as defeated MPP John Wilkinson declined to go to face a stacked deck during an all-candidates debate over wind energy issues in Arthur, those on the positive side of the wind issue will be no where near Atwood next Wednesday.
That is fine and those who have concerns about wind energy, whether those fears are real or imagined, and the politicians who have called the meeting, are fully aware of what this meeting really is.
It is a rally for those opposed to wind energy and a chance to bolster support for the politicians that have rode that opposition to office.
And, if you are one of those people looking for unbiased discussion and unfettered facts about wind energy, you can probably pass on the short trip to Atwood and not miss much.
by JOHN KASTNER
POINT OF VIEW
STRATFORD BEACON HERALD
DON'T EXPECT THE WIND TO BLOW BOTH WAYS AT MEETING
A week from tonight there will be a big meeting at the community centre in Atwood to talk about wind energy.
If you are one of those people sitting on the fence when it comes to wind energy and are seeking impartial, unbiased objective data when it comes to windmills, this might not be the place for you. Let's be honest, the place is going to packed with wind energy opponents.
The "public town hall " meeting has been called by Perth-Wellington MPP Randy Pettapiece who was elected primarily because of votes in rural areas of the riding where there is a significant anti-wind energy sentiment.
His positon on wind energy has been clear from the outset.
"When it comes to wind turbines, the McGuinty government has not been serious about consulting the public", Pettapiece said in a press release announcing the meeting.
"If they won't, we will.
Huron-Bruce MPP Lisa Thompson will also speak at the meeting. She is the Conservatives' critic charged with leading the opposition to the Liberals' Green Energy Act.
Nippissing MPP Vic Fedeli will also be at the meeting. He is the Tories critic for energy.
Talk about preaching to the choir.
Those opposed to wind energy have done a good job of organizing and there are citizens groups opposed to turbines in Perth East, West perth, NorthPerth and Huron East.
But there are pro-wind people out there.
There are farmers that have agreed to wind mills on their property. There are companies that are in the wind energy business and there are apparently way more studies that say wind energy is safe than there are that say it's a legitimate health risk, but they are drowned out by the wind opponents.
It's all well and good and politcally astute for the Conservatives to galvanize the wind opposition in this part of the country.
But no one, including the Conservatives, if they are honest, expects to hear both sides of the wind energy issue in Atwood.
Just as defeated MPP John Wilkinson declined to go to face a stacked deck during an all-candidates debate over wind energy issues in Arthur, those on the positive side of the wind issue will be no where near Atwood next Wednesday.
That is fine and those who have concerns about wind energy, whether those fears are real or imagined, and the politicians who have called the meeting, are fully aware of what this meeting really is.
It is a rally for those opposed to wind energy and a chance to bolster support for the politicians that have rode that opposition to office.
And, if you are one of those people looking for unbiased discussion and unfettered facts about wind energy, you can probably pass on the short trip to Atwood and not miss much.
by JOHN KASTNER
POINT OF VIEW
STRATFORD BEACON HERALD
Tuesday, March 6, 2012
LETTER TO THE EDITOR
LETTER TO THE EDITOR
STRATFORD BEAON HERALD
RE: CFDC SCANDAL
I HAVE BEEN READING WITH INTEREST THE ARTICLES IN THE BEACON HERALD WITH REGARDS TO THE MISAPPROPRIATION OF FUNDS BY JD GRAHAM FROM THE PERTH COMMUNITY FUTURES DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION. I TOOK OFFENSE TO A COMMENT MADE IN DONAL O'CONNOR'S ARTICLE ON THURSDAY MARCH 1 2012 "FRAUD LOSSES OFTEN DON'T GET PAID BACK".
THE COMMENT "RIGHTLY OR WRONGLY THEY DON'T PUT PEOPLE OUT ON THE STREET. AND I THINK ONE OF THE THINGS THE COURT WOULD RECOGNIZE HERE IS THAT THE WINNERS IN THIS CASE ARE NOT PEOPLE. IT'S NOT AS THOUGH THEIR LIVES HAVE BEEN RUINED" HELLO..... THE WINNERS IN THIS CASE ARE PEOPLE. THEY ARE TAXPAYERS, BUSINESS PEOPLE AND REGULAR EVERYDAY PEOPLE AND $763,000.00 WOULD HAVE GONE A LONG WAY TO HELP PEOPLE TO BEGIN OR CONTINUE THEIR BUSINESS. THIS CASE HAS AFFECTED MANY PEOPLE THAT ARE PART OF THE CFDC AND IT IS SHAMEFUL THAT THIS HAS TAKEN PLACE AND PAYBACK IS A MUST. AND NO MATTER WHAT SHAPE THAT TAKES, THE MONEY MUST BE RETURNED AND IF THAT DESTROYS A MAN WHO DESTROYED ALOT OF PEOPLES LIVES THEN THAT IS PART OF THE PAYBACK. WHAT GOES AROUND COMES AROUND AND SOMETIMES IT WILL BITE YOU.
LOUD APPLAUSE TO ALL "HONEST" BUSINESS PEOPLE. WE ARE FEW AND FAR BETWEEN BUT WE ARE A PROUD CREW THAT CAN FACE OUSELVES IN THE MIRROR AND SLEEP AT NIGHT. LETS MAKE THIS CASE IMPORTANT ENOUGH TO STOP IT FROM EVER HAPPENING AGAIN, BECAUSE IT DOES AND HAS AFFECTED PEOPLE.......... IN MANY WAYS.
SHERRIE MCTAGGART
STRATFORD
STRATFORD BEAON HERALD
RE: CFDC SCANDAL
I HAVE BEEN READING WITH INTEREST THE ARTICLES IN THE BEACON HERALD WITH REGARDS TO THE MISAPPROPRIATION OF FUNDS BY JD GRAHAM FROM THE PERTH COMMUNITY FUTURES DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION. I TOOK OFFENSE TO A COMMENT MADE IN DONAL O'CONNOR'S ARTICLE ON THURSDAY MARCH 1 2012 "FRAUD LOSSES OFTEN DON'T GET PAID BACK".
THE COMMENT "RIGHTLY OR WRONGLY THEY DON'T PUT PEOPLE OUT ON THE STREET. AND I THINK ONE OF THE THINGS THE COURT WOULD RECOGNIZE HERE IS THAT THE WINNERS IN THIS CASE ARE NOT PEOPLE. IT'S NOT AS THOUGH THEIR LIVES HAVE BEEN RUINED" HELLO..... THE WINNERS IN THIS CASE ARE PEOPLE. THEY ARE TAXPAYERS, BUSINESS PEOPLE AND REGULAR EVERYDAY PEOPLE AND $763,000.00 WOULD HAVE GONE A LONG WAY TO HELP PEOPLE TO BEGIN OR CONTINUE THEIR BUSINESS. THIS CASE HAS AFFECTED MANY PEOPLE THAT ARE PART OF THE CFDC AND IT IS SHAMEFUL THAT THIS HAS TAKEN PLACE AND PAYBACK IS A MUST. AND NO MATTER WHAT SHAPE THAT TAKES, THE MONEY MUST BE RETURNED AND IF THAT DESTROYS A MAN WHO DESTROYED ALOT OF PEOPLES LIVES THEN THAT IS PART OF THE PAYBACK. WHAT GOES AROUND COMES AROUND AND SOMETIMES IT WILL BITE YOU.
LOUD APPLAUSE TO ALL "HONEST" BUSINESS PEOPLE. WE ARE FEW AND FAR BETWEEN BUT WE ARE A PROUD CREW THAT CAN FACE OUSELVES IN THE MIRROR AND SLEEP AT NIGHT. LETS MAKE THIS CASE IMPORTANT ENOUGH TO STOP IT FROM EVER HAPPENING AGAIN, BECAUSE IT DOES AND HAS AFFECTED PEOPLE.......... IN MANY WAYS.
SHERRIE MCTAGGART
STRATFORD
FRAUD LOSSES OFTEN DON'T GET PAID BACK
By DONAL O'CONNOR STAFF REPORTER
STRATFORD BEACON HERALD
Posted 4 days ago
Based on a Superior Court judgment handed down Feb. 23, Community Futures Development Corp. of Perth County stands to recoup about $760,000 from the Stratford businessperson who defrauded the taxpayer- funded company, but the question now is how much of this public money will materialize.
Under the law, a number of steps may be taken to enforce the court's judgment, but the responsibility for enforcement depends to a large extent on the creditor's determination to settle the score. Efforts aimed at recompense may include investigation of the debtor's assets, seizure and sale of the debtor's real estate and personal property and garnishment of wages.
The means a debtor may have to satisfy the court order also comes into play.
"We intend to pursue this to the full extent of the law and our ability and we'll see wherever it takes us," said Community Futures general manager Nigel Howard in response to a query from The Beacon Herald about the company's chances of recovering the missing funds.
As reported in The Beacon Herald Feb. 24, the court judgment in the Community Futures civil case named J.D. Graham, a former loans manager with the company, as debtor. Graham has more recently been a co-owner of the P'Lovers store in Stratford.
The broad range of circumstances that may be involved in this or similar cases makes it impossible to predict the outcome in terms of actual recovery of funds, but law professor Allan Hutchinson of Osgoode Hall Law School at York University said in an interview that in general there's a reasonably good chance of recompense.
Hutchinson noted wages can be garnished and liens put on personal property and the process can go on for a long time. But he pointed out as well that much depends on whether a person's property is in his own name, whether in a joint name or transferred to a partner.
One challenge is isolating access to particular monies lost in a fraud.
"In general they (Community Futures) are in the same position as any other creditor. The court has a lot of devices available, but they only work if the person has got the assets."
Hutchinson noted that sometimes people sue even though they might not get all the money back to send the message: "We don't tolerate fraud."
There probably are statistics on the degree of success in similar cases, but interpretation is difficult, he said.
"Remember, most cases get settled and that means people don't pay the full amount. They make some deals and compromise."
Although he declined to comment on the specifics of this case, Hutchinson said there probably would have been some deal arrived at about how the debtor intends to pay back what's owing. There are costs involved in the recovery process as well, but Hutchinson said that too is a responsibility of the debtor.
"Because if they put people through a lot of trouble then they have to pay for that cost as well."
The defendant would have likely already signed off on a sworn and registered document listing his assets, he said.
"Rightly or wrongly they don't put people out on the street. And I think one of the things the court would recognize here is that the winners in this case are not people. It's not as though their lives have been ruined."
"Even though the money should be paid back, this organization is still going to continue, the development corporation. And they can, after all, set this off as a business loss."
Hutchinson is associate vice-president and dean of graduate studies at Osgoode Hall Law School.
doconnor@bowesnet.com
STRATFORD BEACON HERALD
Posted 4 days ago
Based on a Superior Court judgment handed down Feb. 23, Community Futures Development Corp. of Perth County stands to recoup about $760,000 from the Stratford businessperson who defrauded the taxpayer- funded company, but the question now is how much of this public money will materialize.
Under the law, a number of steps may be taken to enforce the court's judgment, but the responsibility for enforcement depends to a large extent on the creditor's determination to settle the score. Efforts aimed at recompense may include investigation of the debtor's assets, seizure and sale of the debtor's real estate and personal property and garnishment of wages.
The means a debtor may have to satisfy the court order also comes into play.
"We intend to pursue this to the full extent of the law and our ability and we'll see wherever it takes us," said Community Futures general manager Nigel Howard in response to a query from The Beacon Herald about the company's chances of recovering the missing funds.
As reported in The Beacon Herald Feb. 24, the court judgment in the Community Futures civil case named J.D. Graham, a former loans manager with the company, as debtor. Graham has more recently been a co-owner of the P'Lovers store in Stratford.
The broad range of circumstances that may be involved in this or similar cases makes it impossible to predict the outcome in terms of actual recovery of funds, but law professor Allan Hutchinson of Osgoode Hall Law School at York University said in an interview that in general there's a reasonably good chance of recompense.
Hutchinson noted wages can be garnished and liens put on personal property and the process can go on for a long time. But he pointed out as well that much depends on whether a person's property is in his own name, whether in a joint name or transferred to a partner.
One challenge is isolating access to particular monies lost in a fraud.
"In general they (Community Futures) are in the same position as any other creditor. The court has a lot of devices available, but they only work if the person has got the assets."
Hutchinson noted that sometimes people sue even though they might not get all the money back to send the message: "We don't tolerate fraud."
There probably are statistics on the degree of success in similar cases, but interpretation is difficult, he said.
"Remember, most cases get settled and that means people don't pay the full amount. They make some deals and compromise."
Although he declined to comment on the specifics of this case, Hutchinson said there probably would have been some deal arrived at about how the debtor intends to pay back what's owing. There are costs involved in the recovery process as well, but Hutchinson said that too is a responsibility of the debtor.
"Because if they put people through a lot of trouble then they have to pay for that cost as well."
The defendant would have likely already signed off on a sworn and registered document listing his assets, he said.
"Rightly or wrongly they don't put people out on the street. And I think one of the things the court would recognize here is that the winners in this case are not people. It's not as though their lives have been ruined."
"Even though the money should be paid back, this organization is still going to continue, the development corporation. And they can, after all, set this off as a business loss."
Hutchinson is associate vice-president and dean of graduate studies at Osgoode Hall Law School.
doconnor@bowesnet.com
Sunday, March 4, 2012
THOUGHT FOR TODAY
If people ask me
I always tell them:
Quite well, thank you, I am very glad to say
If people ask me I always answer,
Quite well, thank you, and how are you today
I always answer,
I always tell them
If they ask me
Politely.......
BUT SOMETIMES
I WISH
THAT THEY WOULDN T
by A.A.MILNE
I always tell them:
Quite well, thank you, I am very glad to say
If people ask me I always answer,
Quite well, thank you, and how are you today
I always answer,
I always tell them
If they ask me
Politely.......
BUT SOMETIMES
I WISH
THAT THEY WOULDN T
by A.A.MILNE
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)