Intolerant action aimed at the Belfry
Re: “Belfry Theatre entrance vandalized amid protest over staging of play set in Israel,” Dec. 24.
I am furious to read about the “free Palestine” graffiti plastered outside of Belfry Theatre for their decision to present the play The Runner.
This is an intolerant act by those trying to prevent the presentation of any point of view but the one of the graffiti makers.
Congratulations to the Belfry Theatre for staging a play that reveals the complexity of the situation in the Middle East.
Sandra Levy
Victoria
Unchecked vandalism will leave a chill
Re: “Belfry Theatre entrance vandalized amid protest over staging of play set in Israel,” Dec. 24.
I understand a boycott, maybe even a protest outside a business whose views you don’t agree with, but the vandalizing of the building crosses a line.
If a police investigation is not done, if there are no charges or consequences, then whoever did this vandalism will be encouraged to cross further limits and boundaries in the weeks ahead.
We have seen this already in recent pro-Palestinian protests in malls over Christmas.
In the next few weeks, I believe we will see further targeting of certain businesses and buildings.
The protesters have caricatured the theme and the plot of The Runner, and their minds are made up. It involves Israel, and they don’t want anyone to see this play. That should tell you something right there.
If there is no investigation or consequences for the property damage, make no mistake, cancelling this play will be a harbinger of things to come, and I believe the Belfry will in fact bow to pressure, not only from the rhetoric, but from the vandalism and the feeling of intimidation that results from that, and cancel this play.
Theatre companies will not put on certain plays for fear performances will be protested, audiences intimidated, and their property vandalized.
The anticipation of chaos will lead to the selection of plays that only meet certain agendas, or are apolitical.
David Harrison
Victoria
Different perspectives enhance understanding
Re: “Belfry Theatre entrance vandalized amid protest over staging of play set in Israel,” Dec. 24.
The notion that “it is unacceptable to tell a story on violence in the Middle East from an exclusively Israeli perspective while Palestinians are being killed and displaced” is misguided and wrong.
It is simply an attempt to shut down an opposing point of view, such has been seen for many years on campuses. Such stories can only be told by the given perspective of the writer, and different perspectives all have validity, particularly in the world of art, which can reflect on those very perspectives.
The greatest 20th century American writer was William Faulkner. Despite his own personal racism, a product of his upbringing in the deep South, and his only partially successful struggle to overcome that racism, he wrote novels that are among the strongest exposition and condemnation of that racism.
That he was white does not diminish his great art. The view he was able to depict, of the effect of this horrible treatment of Blacks, on the whites themselves was something that maybe only a white man could have done.
It was later black writers, such as Toni Morrison, who gave us the vital view of slavery and its ongoing effects on Black Americans from own perspective.
As to the use of the word genocide to describe Israeli actions against Palestinians, even Noam Chomsky, the longtime hater of Israel, says that the use of the word genocide in this capacity is an insult to the memories of Holocaust survivors. There is no comparison or analogy.
Richard Volet
Victoria
Shelbourne Valley will see a huge change
The revised Saanich Official Community Plan is being rushed through council with the assumption that (to quote the mayor) “since there has been no public outcry,” the electorate must approve of the plan.
The lack of outcry is because it is impossible to approve or disapprove of the plan’s vague development outlines.
The details that really affect life in Saanich are buried deep in appendices, which can only be accessed by downloading separate files from the council’s website. Most local residents will not have had the time to do that task and possibly still assume that the older guidelines in the appendices will be followed.
One case in point is the Shelbourne Valley development plan, put together in 1997 with public input and approval. The plan envisages lining the main routes with attractively-designed, small apartment blocks, four floors, well separated by green space and with ample set-back from the roads. The architects’ illustrations are attractive. The plan states that the development “will bring enhanced vibrancy to the area.”
After some years of construction (which is still ongoing) what do we have? A selection of large six-floor apartment blocks all with the visual attraction of the Berlin Wall, built close together over every square millimetre of the sites with zero setback from the roads and no trace of green space. The “added vibrancy” is nowhere to be seen. Although this situation is bad, the future looks worse as the council enthusiastically endorses the idea of filling the remaining area with 18-floor apartment towers.
It is totally different from the approved 1997 concept and is a textbook example of how not to develop a suburban area in the 21st century.
There has been no sounding of local opinion on this progress although the continued development, if carried out as currently threatened, will change the area from a viable, stable community into a dismal, overcrowded, ugly, anonymous dormitory for Victoria.
Saanich council does not have a mandate from the electorate to make such a drastic change in our lives.
Development under the plan should either be shelved until such a mandate is obtained by properly polled resident opinion, or alternatively until the council resolves to follow the original 1997 approved concepts in granting development permits.
We have to consider the need for more housing, but this wholesale destruction of the district is not the way to go. It should stop until we have a route forward for acceptable developments.
Alec Mitchell
Victoria
Regional democracy has been sacrificed
Following an Angus Reid review presenting more than 80% regional support for amalgamation followed by municipal election ballot questions showing over 75% support for an amalgamation review (88% of region had question on their ballot) where is the region 10 years later?
Unfortunately, municipal democracy around Victoria remains in seizure mode, with the provincial NDP government continuing to stand alone in Canada in refusing to undertake a regional amalgamation review as voted by the regional populous.
Everywhere else in Canada, an affirmative ballot vote means the province then executes its role of oversight and determines funding contributions between levels of government if any and the regional review then commences.
It is ironic a decade later the NDP is the party that has done so much to prevent more social equity for regional citizens than previous governments by simply refusing to respect and allow local democracy take its course.
Today, as the province helps choreograph their version of regional democracy minus the regional ballot vote, you have a merger examination between Victoria and Saanich where a city like Esquimalt that voted 70% in favour of a review is dismissed as though their voting booth vote never happened. Same goes for Langford and the entire peninsula.
The NDP bought the wrong bill of goods on amalgamation and their “we know what best for you” approach, which simultaneously shut down regionalism and local democracy, has cost and continues to cost the capital region dearly.
John Vickers
Miramichi, New Brunswick
Make health care equal, audit the federal funds
On a ongoing basis we hear from the premiers of all provinces and territories that the federal government does not provide enough funding for medical care.
The federal government has to legislate that all the provinces and territories will have the exactly the same health care coverage. That is, for example, that a procedure covered in B.C. must also be covered in Nova Scotia.
That is not happening. People from B.C. will go to Saskatchewan to obtain coverage that is not covered in B.C. and vice versa. Also applies to the other provinces too.
This procedure has to stop. Medical coverage has to be equal Canadawide.
The federal government makes health care transfers to the provinces and the territories and no one knows if these transfers are going directly into health care. Seems it is not. Some goes to health care and some stays in general revenue.
This has to stop. The only way that this can be stopped is that the federal government sends auditors to each province to see where the actual health transfers were deposited.
Three months after B.C. receives its health-care funding transfer, a federal auditor would audit the B.C. government to see where and how the transfer was distributed.
The amounts being transferred to the provinces and territories are substantial and it seems that some of the funds are not all going to health care.
Legislating that health care be equal Canadawide and sending federal auditors would eliminate the constant complaints that there is not enough funding being transferred to health care.
Joe Sawchuk
Duncan
SEND US YOUR LETTERS
• Email: [email protected]
• Mail: Letters to the editor, Times 91原创, 201-655 Tyee Rd., Victoria, B.C. V9A 6X5
• Submissions should be no more than 250 words; subject to editing for length and clarity. Provide your contact information; it will not be published. Avoid sending your letter as an email attachment.
