To the editor:
Citizens today are more educated, skeptical and capable of understanding the subtle and not so subtle nuances contained within media releases and commentary of their elected representatives.
Here in Thunder Bay, you would think we were in the 1960s given some of the cold war rhetoric we see directed against the provincial government.
For better or worse, our mayor demands apologies and commitments from our Premier respecting the disposition of the Thunder Bay Generating Station.
He declares the Ontario Power Authority incompetent, because it is not in agreement with the assessment of Coun. Iain Angus’ municipal Energy Task Force.
After flailing the premier and her public service, he “respectfully” requests a meeting; sooner rather than later so that he may convince her of that which Mr. Angus and his task force were unable to convince the provincial power authority.
All this, of course, is set against the backdrop of refusing to shake the hand of MPP Michael Gravelle when Cliffs Natural Resources located its refinement facility in Sudbury. We saw no such confrontation when the Conservative Government of Canada passed on P3 funding for the event centre.
No apologies were required. No personal meetings demanded from the prime minister. Citizens do not want their elected representatives to be confrontational with other levels of government.
The reason is simple. We elected them too. We expect all our elected representatives, regardless of partisan party affiliation, to co-operate in matters of day-to-day government and save the histrionics for the campaign trail.
It is perfectly reasonable to express policy differences in a thoughtful and reasonable way.
Confrontation is the device of the bully, and is a third rate tactic shared by second-rate men and women of action.
It doesn’t impress the public, because it doesn’t serve the public. Elected office is not a political campaign; it is a trust that reaches for the best from all who serve.
William Olesky,
Thunder Bay
