The Terrace Standard, Wednesday, April 9, 1997 - AS

Racist charge draws defenders

Use of ugly epithet
requires evidence

Dear Sir:
In the interests of accuracy and fairness, I should
like to comment upon Mr. John How’s letter in the
March 5, 1997 Terrace Standard,

First I should state that { am not a member, sup-
porter or partisan of the Reform Party or of any
other party. I also have-no prior knowledge of Mr.
How or his political affiliations. However, it ap-
pears that he dislikes Reform to the point of ir-
rationality, and that he has no concept of fair play.

Mr. How asserts that there is a widespread per-
ception that Reform is a haven for extremists, red-
necks and racists.

Even if Mr. How’s ‘‘widespread public percep-
tion’”’ exists, this does not prove # public fact. Pub-
lic perceptions are as likely to be influenced by
hearsay and prejudice as by reality.

I have seen no evidence that the Reform Party or
Mr. Manning ever set out to attract or shelter ex-
tremist elements. In fact, that party has made some
very public efforts to distance itself from such ele-
ments, including public repudiation of would-be
Supporters and candidates and public disavowal of
extremist views,

Disgruntled and extremist elements often flock
unbidden to a new political movement, and it takes
time and effort for the movement to sort them out
and convince them that they cannct gain control of
party policy.

The old CCF used to have a similar problem with
radical leftists and it cost them decades of effort
and a lot of lost votes before they established their

relative moderation in the public perception. People -

with radical views are a matter of continuing con-
cern in all parties.

Mr, How again conjures up a dubious ‘‘widely
held opinion”? when he refers to Mr. Jim Fulton's
suggestion that Mr. Mike Scott is a racist. Mr.
Fulton, right or wrong, at Ieast expressed his own
opinion, He did not bide bebind an imputed public
opinion that may be wrong and may be fictitious.

When I hear a public figure called a racist, the
matter gets my complete attention. In particular, I
pay atiention to the supporting evidence for such a
statement. Rumours of “widespread public percep-
tion”’ are not evidence.

If Mr. Scott cannot be shown to have said or done
something racially offensive, 1 must refuse to be-
lieve he is a racist. To date, ] have seen or heard no
evidence whatever supporting such an accusation
against Mr. Scolt.

In a public mecting on land claims held in the
Terrace Hotel banquet room a year or more ago, I
heard a Nisga’a person publicly call Mr. Scott a
racist to his’ face. J listened very carefully in the
belief that I was about to hear some supporting evi-

Mr. Scott may be right or wrong in
his opposition te current land claim
proceedings, but opposition does
not make him a racist.

dence, but none was given.

The term racist is an ugly and potent epithet
which should never be used unless it is immediately
supported by evidence. In the absence of such evi-
dence, Mr. Scott must be presumed not merely in-
nocent but falsely accused. His accuser may proper-
ly be suspected of abusing free speech to smear Mr.
Scott because he is apposed to the Nisga’a political
agenda.

This discreditable behaviour was not countered or
discovered by any of the Nisga’a leaders present.
One hopes this docs not indicate their support or
approval of such base tactics.

I feel that Mz. Scott showed great forbearance in
not taking legal action in this instance. Perhaps he
has a soft spot for natives which his opponents are
unwilling to acknowledge.

Mr. Scott may be right or wrong in his opposition
to current land claim proceedings, but opposition
does not make him a racist. The fact is that he has
raised legal, historical and practical concerns about
land claims which his ,

opponents seem unwill-
ing to address.

These opponents
should deal with Mr.
Scott by confronting and
demolishing his land
claim arguments, if they
can, instead of indulging
in schoolyard taunting
and name-calling appat-
ently designed to evade
those arguments. The

public interest demands
that they be treated
seriously. _

Certainly it makes no ; :

sense for any potitician Mike Scott
to be racist these days when majority public
opinion is strongly against it, We all know how
long natives have waited and bow hard they have
struggled to get to this point where an agreement is
possible. This makes it all the more urgent to get
the thing right.
. Natives in this area are numerous, rapidly increas-
ing, well-organized, and likely to vote en bloc.
They also tend to respect only those political con-
victions which support their current objectives. It
takes real political guts to oppose any part of the
native agenda, as Mr, Scott has done.

It is far easier to espouse native objectives uncriti-
cally and to collect their bloc vote as a political
reward, even if so doing sets us all up for enormous
problems in future.

Public discussion of this issue should not be
drowned out by partisan demagogvery which in-
flames passions and derails rational pursuit of the
public good. 7

; ELV. Smith
Terrace, B.C,

TERRACE STANDARD

The Mail Bag

College cuts

Dear Sir:

It seems strange that Northwest Community
College is continuing with the plan to cut courses
just when an increasing number of families in our
afea are experiencing an economic crisis duc to
Repap debt.

These families will be even Jess able to pay the
high cost of their children leaving the northwest

COLLEGE STUDENTS here took to the streets fast month to protest against extensive
cuts to university-transfer courses offered here.

inexplicable

lo have choices in college or university courses.
Why is it that the president of Northwest Com-
munity College gets a year off at taxpayers’ ex-
pense when many of us in the communily will
suffer at his illogical decisions. Is the college tol
accountable to the community?
Heather Hassan
Terrace, B.C.

Blind to Quebec

Dear Sir:

Mr. How’s comments on the Reform Party of
Canada having members with racist views show 4
very myopic view of the political situation in Cana-
da today.

One need look no further than Quebec to see
racism being practised in its worst form. Racism in
our country has been institutionalized by the Parti
Quebecois, is explicity supported by the Bloc
Quebecois, and tacitly condoned by the Liberal
Party of Canada.

Successive rounds of legislation by the PQ, in-
cluding the repressive, regressive and illegal Bill
101, have reduced the non-Francophone minority to
second class citizens in the very province in which
they were born,

For years now, they have turned in vain to our
Federal government to have the law of the Jand ap-

i plied in their province, a law which permits any-

one, anywhere to express themselves in whatever

Z langauge they choose.

Twice in the past eight years the Human Rights
Commission of the United Nations has found Cana-
da, a so-called bastion of democracy, guilty of fail-
ing to protect a linguistic minority by assuring it the

‘inalienable right io free specch.

And what have our political leaders done about
these abuses? Two successive Prime Ministers,
Brian Mulroney and Jean Chretien, Quebecers both,
have tumed a blind cye to blatant discrimination
based on race and outrighi violations of the right to
free specch as guaranteed by our Charter of Rights
and Freedoms.

Both have displayed evidence of having the go-
nads of 3 castrato and the backbone of a bow! of
jello.

Canadians have the right to expect our political
elite to ensure that our laws are applied cqually
across the land, and this do-nothing, say-nothing
approach by Chretien and his Liberals makes them
complicit im the crime.

This limp-wristed leadership at the very top of
our country has emboldened the racist PQ, and has
resulted in'a situation where the world community
now views Canada right up there with such demo-

cratic heavyweights as Hitler's Germany and
present-day Nigeria.

It’s yet another case of deja-vu. Six decades ago,
the Nazis sent jack-booted brown shirts to the doors
of the Jews; today the PQ sends hysterical language
police to the doors of the English. So much for
Canada, the true north strong and free.

Mr. How was very correct in saying that there is
racism in Canadian politics, He only failed to iden-
tify the guilty partics, Quebec’s Parti Quebecois has
taken it to new heights, and their repressive policies
have the overt support of the Bloc Quebecois and
the covert support of the federal Liberals.

Mr. How put it very apily when be said a racist is
a macist is a racist. | apree, because no malter how
you pluck the duck, a canard is a canard is a canard.

Rob Hargrove
Terrace, B.C.

Danger signs

Dear Sir:

Joy McPhail took an extreme hard fine last
month. When speaking of hospital boards she stated
adamantly that she would investigate the back-
grounds of those wishing to volunteer their time to
ensure that they were not Pro-Lifers.

Since when in Canada do we investigate back-
grounds for volunteer boards? While I am known
lo share the Pro-Choice philosophy, I take severe
offence that those whose opinions do not concur
with my own would be publicly blacklisted from a
volunteer position, Do we now change the tem
“McCarthyism” to a more Canadianized
“*McPhailism’’?

Isce a veiled danger if McPhail proceeds without
public comment, If actions like these advance un-
checked, what is the next step? A citizens’ registry
of background and political beliefs? Recrimina-
tions for corporations that supported other political
parties?

Not that many miles away in our ever shrinking
world, people called political dissidents still rot in
jails. Joy McPhail represents the first step to this
brand of governance, LO '

- Linda Hawes
Terrace, B.C,

Gender bias dismaying

* An open letter to Premier Glen Clark:

I am dismayed by the initiative undertaken by the
Ministry of Employment and Investment recently
on Women in The Forest Industry.

I have attended two workshops in Terrace, The
first one I understand was designed to gather in-
formation on whether a need exists in providing
women a greater apportunity to obtain employment
within the forest industry. At that time I expressed
the viewpoint that women did not need special at-
tention.

Anyone who wants to become involved in this in-
dustry can do so through many existing initintives
— and their own personal commitment. These
comments were briefly summarized in a report.

The second workshop was to identify project
ideas to enhance training aad employment op-
portunities for women in the forest industry. I was
disappointed that this second workshop was even
considered necessary.

I did not receive an agenda prior to this workshop
and managed to attend for the last hour. By this
time a group of women whose jobs involve secur-
ing government monies — the Terrace Women's
Resource Centre, Community Futures, Northwest
Community College, and Human Resources Devel-
opment Canada — decided to pursue a number of
projects which I feel are neither needed nor wanted,

J have worked in the forest indusiry since 1979 as
a forest technician and just recently as a profes-
sional forester, 1 have operated a forestry consulting.
company since 1983 with two partners.

] have seen many men and women come and go
in this line of work. It is an exciting and demanding
career and is not for everyone, I do not see a need
to single out women (or any other special group) to
provide opportunilics in this indusiry — or any
other industry for that matter.

I have found that ‘‘special’’ programs and carecr
initiatives do not make for the best employees. The
best employees are those with their own initiative
to do what they set out do despite the odds. I
strongly disagree with gender-geared initiatives and
am personally insulted by this one.

I also disagree with spending tax dollars and es-
pecially Forest Renewal B.C. dollars on this type of
program.

I do however, strongly support spending those
FRBC monies on displaced forest workers (male
and female), for promoting value-added initiatives,
and for enhancing forest lands to provide for the so-
cial and economic needs of the people of B.C.

Tam also a member of Canadian Women in Tim-
ber (CWIT), a grassroots organization made up of
mostly women and children.

We promote the wise use of our forest resource
through education. In Terrace this education is
mostly geared toward school-aged children. We do
not — and will not —~ separate our information
packages into gender specilic programs.

We agreed to the awareness/mentoring program
and the information package on employment op-
portunities only as long as it was not gender
specific. We are not interested in continuing wilh
these initiatives if the gender bias is emphasized.

I feel training opportunities are available for those
people who wish to work in the forest industry. The
fact that currently the industry is experiencing a
downturn should not be ignored by your ministry.

My company is small yet I have at least 50
resumes per ycar submitted (to fill ane or two posi-
tions) from highly trained and experienced men and
women looking for work. Is there a need to increase
this number of resumes? I might add that at least
half these resumes are from women.

I feel these initiatives should be approached on a
broader basis including all members of the popula-
tion. The forest industry is made up of men and
women working together.

Training programs, information and entrepreneur-
ial opportunities the employment and investment
ministry undertakes should reflect this reality.

Diana Wood, RPF, Terrace, B.C.

Women aren’t equal

Dear Sir:

Erika Nicholson (letier, March 5) is not an adyo-
cate of gender geared programs or initiatives.

She fails to recognize that treating everyone the
same most often means treating everyonc as if they
were men. The status quo is often a gender based
system, but onc based on only one gender. To bring
women’s differing needs into a system doesn’t in-
troduce gender polilics into it; it is merely an effort
to have both genders represented fairly.

Ms. Nicholson further states ‘‘segregating people
in groups based on their outward appearance does
nothing good for society.”’

Women's tights groups work on behalf of women
not because they lock different from men, but be-
cause their life experiences are offen so different,
Women very often are the primary care givers of
their children, and therefore, have a much more
complicated time getting themselves to a week long
course in Prince Rupert, for example.

Most men with small children have a wife to take
care of the little ones, If we treat everyone the
same, it is only a very special mother who can take
that course in Rupert, and a very untypical father
who can’t because hie is unable to leave bis children
for a week.

This means the course in Rupert, and perhaps a
career in forestry, is effectively open toa few, spe-
cial women and to many men. This is not equality
of opportunity, and equality is what we are after.

Advocates of women’s equality don't bombard
women with the idea they necd a job with non-
traditional positions but are being curtailed by a
system they see as discriminatory,

Ms. Nicholson has put forward her opinion that
tax dollars are not needed to gel more women
working in forestry. Women wanting to get into
forestry have different, equally valid opinions.

Karla Hennig, Terrace Women’s Resource

Centre