An alternative to both old parties?

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

Send this article to a friend.

A Reader's View

Editor: I am somewhat bewildered and dismayed by the Guardian editorial of May 22.

I was of the opinion that editors were there to ensure the expression of unbiased/balanced opinions about issues of the day.

Nevertheless, here we have an outright endorsement of a former provincial politician, now ensconced in the center of an issue which the courts have found to be tainted.

Not that he did anything wrong, but let’s get real here, the fix was in from the beginning with his friends.

Sadly, it happens over and over again in politics. It is the old ‘wink wink/nod nod’ club at its finest (or worst, I would suggest).

In most circles, it is called “influence peddling” and should result in the individuals doing so, being dismissed from their jobs . . . without pension/ perks. Now wouldn’t that be a first?

Frankly, the taxpayers can no longer, (if ever they could) afford such shenanigans.

No, I am not a PC member but I would think the Guardian should allow the PC party of P.E.I. to select the next leader without the unsolicited  rhetoric of editorial comment or perhaps this is an attempt to influence the outcome of the process with an eye to ensuring that the PC party is not a viable contender at all in the upcoming election.

Folks, there is another alternative to both these old parties. Think about it. . . .

It has been said that the definition of insanity is doing the same thing repeatedly, and expecting different result. Well, on P.E.I. we have been doing the same thing repeatedly for 130 year. We need to consider the alternative.

Using the logic of the editorial, Mike Duffy would make a palatable choice for the next PC leader, or maybe Patrick Brazeau/ Pamela Wallin could come and vacation on P.E.I. for six months plus a day and they too could be contenders.

And they could take Mike Duffy along to finally establish his residency. Hey, maybe they could all rent his cottage in Cavendish. It would save the tax payers of Canada some additional expense claims. No, they would all probably claim it individually.

Is it any wonder that the Canadian public is fed up with politics/ politicians and the senate and the various appointment processes?

Is it any wonder that most of the current politicians are loathe to change the system?

I say that the people of Canada deserve a referendum on the whole question of the continuance of the senate. It should not be ‘decided’ by the very politicians who are taking up space while awaiting their payout/ appointment as their entitled reward for being good and faithful political party hacks over the years.

We may not be able to infiltrate/ influence ACOA decisions to ensure that fairness and equity always prevail, but surely we should have a voice in such issues as the senate. It would seem that a simple question on the ballot at the next election could answer the question for/ by Canadians. Yes or No?

Susan Birt,

Fortune Bridge

Geographic location: P.E.I., Canada, Cavendish

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Thanks for voting!

Top of page