Changes reduce EI unfairness

Letters to the Editor (The Guardian)
Send to a friend

Send this article to a friend.

Editor: I am pleased to see that Jim Sentance followed the links I provided and now agrees that Charlottetown is not the only “Census Agglomeration” (CA) used to determine EI economic regions in Canada. His original commentary was very definitive on this point but it appears he’s changed his tune after reading the regulations. While he speculates on what policymakers may have been thinking when they used these descriptions in 1996, Mr. Sentance seems to say that whatever those considerations were then; they are no longer relevant today.

I might also add that his attempt to relegate this to some sort of aberration of history by referring to 1996 as “a couple of decades ago” is a rather feeble attempt to put some spin on the conversation.

After you wade through the comments of irrelevance, red herring and other gobbley gook the point that Mr. Sentance seems to “stand by” is that P.E.I. is too small to have two EI regions. That of course is his personal opinion, which he is entitled to hold.

Mr. Sentance is obviously opposed to this policy change which comes as a victory to many of the Island’s rural communities. I am pleased to see that he has now acknowledged that Census Agglomerations were not used as stand alone descriptions of EI Regions. In my own view, P.E.I. has many diverse communities with varying degrees of employment opportunity. This change reduces an unfairness levied against rural Islanders.

Dan Aiken,

Warren Grove

Geographic location: Charlottetown, Canada, Islanders Warren Grove

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Thanks for voting!

Top of page