wise.

tee ee u
’

Armchair democracy —
While the world’s attention has been drawn to the _ ;

extraordinary events in China over the past two weeks, —
“we've been looking at things a bit closer to‘ home and —

‘seeing some curious comparisons.; a

_ Few witnesses could fail to be moved by. reports that

Perhaps that’s the nature of byelections, but par-
‘ticipation in the regular election last November can’t
really be called a resounding affirmation of the | )
democratic process either. Democracy, like charity,

begins at home, and it’s clearly ironic that we cheer on
__ the Chinese from the sidelines and don’t bother to use
- the rights that they can’t get even by standing the

most populous nation in the world on its head.

~---One thing the Chinese have shown us is that,
~ economic systems aside, democracy is the only known

‘means to prevent those in power from transferring
‘that power to their relatives — ideological or other-
‘An interesting approach that has been suggested for
determining who runs the country — or province or
municipality — is compulsory voting. The standard
argument against forced ballot-casting is that govern-
‘ments at all levels should be elected by people who
care eriough to become informed and vote voluntarily.

_ On the other side, it could be said that the electoral
process is too important to allow indifference to

‘undermine it,

‘Part of the problem may be difficulty in identifying
exactly what we’re voting for, as illustrated by the.
atest federal budget. Is it time to legislate compulsory
delivery on election promises? What political party
would pass that one?

Oppressed and embattled as the Chinese are, at least .

‘they know now what they up against. Can we say the

‘Established May 1, 1985 Second-class mall
The Terrace Review is published registration No. 6896.
each Wednesday by All material appearing in the Terrace Review ls

protected under Canadian copyright Registre-
tlon No, 362775 and cannot legally be repro-
duced for any reason without permission of the
publisher.

i Close-Up Business Services Ltd.

Publisher:

: Saniora out of Terrace and District $15.00

Eee

Errore end omisstons. Advertising is accepted
‘Mark Twytord on the condition that in ihe event of
: Editor: ‘typographical error, that portion of the advertis-
: lek ing space occupied by the erroneous Item will
Michael Kelly not be of a a rs but the balance of the acver-
att Pi . w .
Staff Reporter: - Advertisers muat aseurna responsibilty 1or er-
Tod Strachan rors in any classified ad which is aupailed to the
“Advertising Manager: sera eee with the B.C. Human Rights Act
Marj Twyford ~ no advertivement will be published whieh
Soe discriminates against a person due to age, race,
Typesetting: ou orange 86x, nationallty, ancestry or place
Carrie Olson '
uction Manager: 4535 Greig Avenue,
= Jim Hall’. et Terrace, B.C.
“~ Production: | ‘V8G 1M7
“Alvin Stewart, Phone: 635-7840
urbax Gill, Linda Mercer “ Fax! 635-7260
™ Office: - we A
 eecounting: ver ineipiene:
m han Twyford a — Out of Canada $50.00
Harminder Do: sanjh ae + Santora In Terrace and District $12.00

LSORRY |

LOT FULL

i
wt

al oN

Letters to the Editor

Realism in.
language

To the Editor; — .
Brian Koven put his button

the line to help. others, and -

somebody has kicked it... .
When a. professional person
takes a daring risk for a worthy
cause he or she believes in, con-
troversy and personal attacks
can be expected. A man has been
misquoted — mistakes happen

* and as a journalist I under-
stand how this can occur. But in
a town of this size, the record
must be set straight, and rumors
squelched. oO

' “Project Squeeze’ had high
aspirations: to educate. the
young people about the effects
of alcohol abuse. Who better to
speak to those kids, but other
kids? The Skeena Theatre Arts
students took on the respon-
sibility to influence their peers
and younger kids in a positive
way, and they were allowed the
freedom to. speak to others in
their own language, on their
own level, about a world they
could understand. Mr. Koven

was an advisor,'a director, but

the students did the script

development, writing, and act-.

ing — aimed not toward parents
and teachers, but toward other
students.

I witnessed a rehearsal during
which Mr. Koven talked. to the
students about “bad language”’
and its role in the play. He ad-
vised them to tone it down, to be
cautious about its use and limit
the use of certain words. . In a
few tare scenes, certain. words

‘added to the believability of a

situation. At no time did I ever
hear Mi, Koven encourage the

“. stadents to use profanity. Atone _
point; Mr. Koven and 1 discuss-

ed the issue, and I expressed my

_. own opinion of the use of the

“S.word’. As the mother ofa

walked into a school and heard
far worse language coming from
the mouths of six and seven-

year-olds. Anyone who believes

10-year-old, 1 have many times .

that our.innocent children's ears
are virgin, should casually walk
through the crowds at. public
school recess, and they might
learn a few new terms. Kids do
not talk to other kids in the same
language that kids talk to adults.
I don’t mean that every child
usés “bad words’, but I don’t

‘feel that they have been in-

troduced to any new language
through seeing ‘‘Squeeze’’.
Anyway, my opinions on pro-
fanity are not the issue — a
man’s professional reputation
has been tainted, and I just
wanted to protest any rumors

saying that Mr, Koven en-

courages his students to cuss.
Brian -Koven cares about his
students, cares about this pro-
ject and its influence on- its
target audience. So

Mr. Koven, his students, and

all those involved in “Squeeze” -

and ‘“‘Juice’”’ deserve a round of

applause for daring to speak to

our kids ‘on their own level,
about a problem that many peo-
ple deny the existence of: youth
related alcohol abuse. I would

like to thank them for that ser-

vice to our community.
Stephanie Wiebe,
, Terrace.

Residential
tax burden

To the Editor;

1 recently had a conversation
about school taxes with a friend
of mine, He was justifiably an-
oyed at yet another increase

and after a suitable tirade at the.

municipal culprits, he started to

comment on the education

taxes, He was a bit kinder to the
education system — I guess my
explanations over the years have

had some effect — but his part--
ing comment was that someone —
should tell the public how the} .
provincial Socreds have trans- |

ferred the burden of school taxes

from themselves and non- |
residential taxpayers to the local |

homeowner, So here goes.

_ From 1982 to 1988-89, the
revenue for education from pro-
vincial. government grants and
non-residential property taxes
rose from $1,242 billion to
$1,426 billion. In that figure is a
drop in the revenue from non-
residential . property owners
from $662.2 million to $501.8
million, a decrease of 24.2 per-
cent. These two combined give
an increase over six years of 14.8
percent (about 2.5 percent per
year), This clearly wasn’t
enough to meet inflation over
the same period, so where did
they (the provincial government)
get the extra from? You guessed
it; from the residential property
owner... While the increase in
provincial grants went up 14.8
percent, the B.C. home owners’
taxes went up a whopping 45.5
percent, Co ,
Here in Terrace over the same
1983-to-1988 period, the picture
is. even worse for the home ~
owner. Terrace non-residential
property Owners presently pro-
vide less school tax revenue than’
they did in 1983 by 35 percent,
while residential property own-
ers. provide more than they did
in 1983 by 134 percent. .
This information didn’t make

my friend any happier about

paying his taxes, and it is not go-

" ing to make it any easier for the”
general public. If we want a

change to fair taxation, we are
going to have to change the gov-
ernment.
Source of figures: B.C.
Ministry of Education, B.C.
Assessment Authority, Roll
Totals, Notices of Final Deter-
mination, ;
-. "Helmut Giesbrecht,
ee .. Terrace.

_. .More
— detters
— page7 |