Parkades the very definition of necessary evil

It might be possible to design a beautiful parkade — I’ve just never seen one.

I’ve seen parkades that are less ugly than others, where designers have given it the old college try, working in some brick, a little glass, maybe even a store or two on the sidewalk side. But, let’s face it, parkades are dreary places, caverns where the sun seldom shines, where plant life is impossible. Concrete mazes where old chewing gum and urine and cigarette butts rule.

Parkades, in short, are the very definition of necessary evil.

In Kamloops, we have a few parkades. The two downtown — Lansdowne Street and Seymour Street — relics of the ’70s, cement boxes with no redeeming architectural value. They had some costly structural upgrades a few years ago, but they remain what they are — unattractive places where you park your car.

The Royal Inland Hospital parkade is actually hated by many, but that’s because of the pay-parking system, not the utilitarian design of the parkade, in which you drive around in circles for several minutes hoping to find a spot before you exit out the other end.

The Civic Building (art gallery, library and TNRD) has an underground parkade but the public can’t park there because it was designed about 10 per cent as big as it should be.

One might say parkades don’t have to be beautiful. They’re like cheap hotel rooms; you only spend time there after you’ve been somewhere else working or shopping, so who cares?

Would you care if the City of Kamloops was to build a honking big parkade on the street right in front of Riverside Park? Try to visualize it.

I’m trying. At this week’s City council workshop, a tentative plan was presented for exactly that. The City’s engineering department has tried to come up with something that will look half decent, with some landscaping.

But it’s right in front of Heritage House, and it’s going to be controversial, and it’s probably not going to be pretty, though a public consultation process hasn’t been figured out yet.

We don’t really have any idea what it will look like, either (City real estate manager Dave Freeman acknowledged yesterday the plan as it sits “has been called a doodle.”)

There are competing interests here. One is the need to maintain a vibrant, worker- and visitor-friendly downtown that’s easy to get in and out of. Not to mention a crying need for more parking for Interior Savings Centre.

The other is protection of Riverside Park.

On the second, I don’t believe the park would suffer from some thoughtful development. Some commercial operations already exist there, and a waterfront hotel attached to ICS would have been a huge benefit.

But I worry about uglifying the adjacent area with another parkade. I say another, because the new Sandman on the corner of Third and Lorne will have a parkade of its own.

While the City’s engineering department says using the Heritage House parking lot will save the cost of purchasing new land for a parkade, fact is the City once owned the land on which the Sandman will be built — and that land was acquired specifically for parking.

Yet, when the City instead sold it to Tom Gaglardi, there were no strings with respect to public parking.

In 2008, we wrote in an editorial: “It (the hotel) will be good for tourism, and it will be good for downtown business. And it will provide the city with a central meeting place for major events. But the deal is not without its question marks.

“It‘s troubling, for example, that the sale is not conditional on a minimum number of parking spots being reserved for public use at arena events. Parking has been a weakness of the arena’s location ever since its construction, and the Levesque property (the land purchased and then sold by the City to Gaglardi) offered at least a partial solution.

“Now, though, Gaglardi will have the final say on parking. According to City Hall, it will work with Gaglardi to examine the parking issue, but clearly there are no guarantees. A third downtown parkade was supposed to be completed five years ago.

“Not planned, not started, but completed. It’s long overdue, and the property in question is ideally located — incorporated into the hotel plans, it could double as daytime parking for the downtown area, and night parking for arena and Riverside Park events.”

Clearly, no such arrangement has been negotiated. The failure to provide public parking within the Sandman deal has never been explained. And now, we could well have parkades across the street from each other butting up against our number one park.

mrothenburger@kamloopsnews.ca

http://www.armchairmayor.wordpress.com

Lake remains in the nose-bleed section

No front-row ticket for Terry Lake. The biggest surprise of a rather uninspiring cabinet shuffle Monday is that the Kamloops-North Thompson MLA is still a backbencher.

I fully expected to be writing an article defending Lake’s choice for cabinet despite the HST fiasco (for which he can hardly be blamed, though he’s made a few untimely remarks).

Boosting him to cabinet would have made good political sense. Since he’s likely to be among the first MLAs targeted for recall, it seemed a sure bet Premier Gordon Campbell would throw him a lifeline with the added credibility of a cabinet post.

Beyond that, the sometimes irascible Lake has a lot of qualities that make him cabinet material — smart, politically savvy (most of the time), and a fast study on issues.

During the last election, it was rumored he was in line for the transportation portfolio as soon as he sewed up the win. When he squeaked in and the appointment didn’t happen, it seemed all he’d need was some experience and some patience until the next shuffle.

Instead, the relatively unknown Stephanie Cadieux from Surrey is the only cabinet newcomer. A nice enough resume, including having been active in a paraplegic association (she’s a wheelchair user) before being elected in 2009, and sitting on a few standing committees since. But hardly head and shoulders above Lake.

Meanwhile, Kevin Krueger gets a welcome break from being hammered by the cranky B.C. arts community over cuts to government funding, changing portfolios to social development.

At first glance, I’m not seeing how this shuffle helps the Campbell government much.

Latest Angus Reid poll, a couple of weeks ago, shows the New Democrats with double the popular support of the Liberals and obliterating them in the Interior of the province if an election were held now. Both Lake and Krueger would lose their jobs to an NDP inland tsunami, while the Liberals would be left with an enclave in the Lower Mainland.

Yet, Cadieux from the Coast is elevated to Minister of Community, Sport and Cultural Development (a piece of which is from Krueger’s old collection of portfolios) while Lake is left in the nose-bleed section.

The big question, of course, is why Finance Minister Colin Hansen is still finance Minister Colin Hansen. The only answer coming to mind is that the premier had no choice. To move him would be to hand Fight HST a new round of ammunition.

I’m sure political science professors — those leftie academics we in the media so love to quote at such times — will have all kinds of not-very-useful things to say about Hansen, Campbell and the rest.

But good for the poli sci profs — they’re about the only ones interested in this latest cabinet “realignment.”

Vaughn Palmer — one of my favourite columnists mostly because he writes things I agree with — wrote yesterday that “the problem is not with the shufflees, it is with the shuffler.”

In other words, the new lineup is merely a short-term distraction until Campbell is ready to quit.

Meanwhile, Terry Lake waits patiently back in row 19 with his binoculars trained on the action up at the front benches.

AT THE MOMENT, Lake’s chair in the legislature is a little south of the NDP seats, across from the main body of Liberals. Directly across the floor from him is none other than Stephanie Cadieux, who will, of course, be moving to a spot with a better view.

mrothenburger@kamloopsnews.ca

http://www.armchairmayor.wordpress.com

How much do we really need to know?

When it comes to the details of what bad people do to other people, how much is too much? The Col. Russell Williams sex-and-murder case ignited a predictable debate over the release of graphic evidence.

Did we really need to see pictures of this depraved man dressed in bras and panties?

Did we need to know about his unique masturbation preferences?

Did we need to hear quotes from his victims begging for their lives?

I say no, others say definitely.

There was no legal necessity for the prosecution to get into all that. Williams pleaded guilty to break and enter, sex assault and murder. It’s unclear to me why prosecutors decided to go ahead and release the stuff anyway.

Equally complicit is the judge, who could have excluded most of it.

I got a call one evening from Derek Cook, a political science prof at TRU. His view was that the media should pressure Stephen Harper to step in and stop the publication of details around the Williams case because it was giving a black eye to our military.

I’m a big fan of our open court system and its independence from political interference, so I don’t buy that approach. But I do believe some discretion was called for.

Those who say we needed to read and see every lurid detail of Williams’ behaviour suggest we wouldn’t know what a monster he is otherwise. To which I say, why wouldn’t we? Isn’t it enough to know that he is a man of rare cruelty who raped and murdered?

Are we really so bereft of intelligence and compassion that we need to be assaulted with what borders on visual and written pornography to understand the man must never be allowed on the street again?

One of our editors agreed wholeheartedly that the coverage of Williams given by some media was thoroughly disturbing, but confessed he felt compelled to watch it.

Kind of like stopping to gawk at a car accident, I suppose, but nothing is stopping us from looking away. Since we as information consumers aren’t all that good at turning off the radio or TV, or closing the page on a newspaper, how about the system and the media taking some responsibility?

Media decisions on such matters almost always involve some democratic discussion but ultimately come down to someone’s decision. My decision was not to run any pictures of Williams wearing the underwear of his victims, to substantially tone down the details of Canadian Press stories (to the point where another editor remarked that I’d reduced it to being “like any other murder story”) and not to run the evidence portions of the story on our front page.

I don’t feel all sanctimonious about it; I just feel the media can do their job without hitting us over the head with brutal detail. Most media went that route with Allan Schoenborn and Robert Pickton; Williams should have gotten the same treatment.

Bottom line: are we better off for knowing all about how Williams’ victims were tied up and how they were brutalized, tortured and, in two cases, heartlessly murdered?

I say no. The only benefit is that Williams has been humiliated about as much as any one man can be. But that isn’t enough to justify us being subjected to such gruesome fare.

PARTING THOUGHT for a blustery October weekend: Maybe Carole James should adjust her criteria for booting people out of the party to include MLAs who say stupid things. Harry Lali, our NDP member from down south in the Nicola Valley, mused this week that the Basi-Virk corruption case must be all about racism. Lali’s reasoning: the three men accused in the scandal are “all brown and happen to be Indo-Canadian.” Never mind that Dave Basi and Bobby Virk pleaded guilty. By the end of the week, Lali was sheepishly apologizing for engaging his mouth before his brain, but he might be a bigger burden for James to bear than Bob Simpson.

mrothenburger@kamloopsnews.ca

http://www.armchairmayor.wordpress.com

More fun with The Kamloops Project

Spent some more time today processing stuff for The Kamloops Project. It’s highly labour intensive, though the way the website has been set up makes parts of the process go very smoothly.

Going through people’s pictures and comments is an absolute joy.

At the same time as the website is being polished up, work is well underway on the special section that goes to press at the end of next week and will be published Saturday, Oct. 30.

 

Studies mean what we want them to mean

National surveys comparing cities, while always interesting for their content, are equally interesting for the knee-jerk, cover-your-nethers defensive posture of those whose oxes are being gored.

Invariably, a favourable study will have the mayor and chamber of commerce becoming instant believers in the truth of the study. An unfavourable one confirms them as doubting thomases.

Last week, the annual Macleans magazine study on crime statistics put Kamloops in 20^th spot on the “most dangerous cities in Canada” list. Nothing to write home about but it was greeted with a sense of relief hereabouts in view of last year’s 13^th place finish (the year before that we were in 12^th).

“That’s a significant improvement,” concluded RCMP Insp. Yves Lacasse, who went on to explain the police strategies that resulted in the ranking change. He’s hoping for even better next year.

Yet, after the 2009 version of the same study was released, Mayor Peter Milobar brushed off the methodology — and, hence, the validity of the entire study — as flawed because it used outdated statistics.

“I know our crime rate is going down and the local RCMP have been working very hard to address targeted areas,” Milobar said in a Daily News story headlined “Danger City — Mayor Decries Old Info.”

RCMP agreed with the mayor’s assessment. Even this newspaper felt behoved to defend Kamloops at that time. The Tournament Capital is, we contended, a safe city, and its comparatively poor showing actually showed that Canada is a safe country.

But now that we’ve improved a few rankings, the survey suddenly has more cred.

What did other cities have to say this year? Mayor Pat Fiacco of Regina, which ranked third, “freely uses an eight-letter word starting with ‘bull’ to describe Maclean’s coverage of his town,” said the magazine.

Second-place Victoria downplays the survey. “It’s safe to walk downtown, you can go for dinner and go to a movie and you’re safe — it’s a safe city,” said Sgt. Grant Hamilton.

Dan Rogers, the mayor of Prince George (“The Most Dangerous City in Canada”) is one of the few to acknowledge that the study reflects something close to reality. Rogers promised crime issues in Pulp Town will be addressed.

 

We take from surveys what we want. Back in May, MoneySense magazine put us in 63^rd spot among Canada’s Best Places to Live. That was an improvement from 81^st the year before.

Again, Milobar saw the bright side — Kelowna placed 115^th. And we were “moving in the right direction.” Even though his math was a little off, he preferred to think of us as being in the top third.

Interestingly, Victoria — despite being the second most dangerous city in Canada — was in the top 10 as one of the most livable. Apparently, it’s a great place to get mugged in.

Burnaby, if you didn’t already know, is Canada’s Best-Run City, according to a 2009 study done by the Atlantic Institute for Market Studies for Macleans. And, would you believe Surrey is third?

Kamloops wasn’t included in that study because it didn’t make the cut population-wise. Too bad; comparisons with our arch-rivals Prince George and Kelowna on that score would make for some great editorials.

Despite being number one, Burnaby came out as one of the least politically engaged cities along with Calgary, Burnaby, Richmond and poor old Victoria. Conversely, the worst-run city, Charlottetown, had one of the highest voter turnouts. Not sure what the message is there.

If “best and worst” studies of our cities upset us so much, maybe we should just all ignore them. Easier said than done, of course. If you live in Williams Lake, or Quesnel, or Campbell River, and your town is declared one of the worst places in the country in which to live, you’re going to find it hard to ignore a study that says so.

Cities live or die on their reputations just as businesses do. Being known as the best of something beats being the worst of something every time, no matter how good or bad the study that says so. That’s why community leaders get their feelings hurt so easily if the reviews aren’t positive.

And that’s also why studies that judge our cities make such good fodder for the water cooler.

mrothenburger@kamloopsnews.ca

http://www.armchairmayor.wordpress.com

Just another routine Kamloops Project

It wouldn’t be Kamloops Project day if I didn’t write something about how I’ve been spending this Oct. 19, 2010. You never know how something brand new is going to turn out until you try it — suffice it to say, the Kamloops Project is already a roaring success, and it’s not over yet.

Richard, with my baby.

I began by driving up to the Broadcast Centre where associate news editor Catherine Litt — the heart and brains behind the Kamloops Project — and I did stints with Cheryl Blackwell on B100 and with Stan Bailey and Henry Small on 98FM. Thanks very much to them, as well as TV7 and Peter Olsen at NL for your support today and during the past several days.

Since the Kamloops Project is all about capturing everyday goings-on in Kamloops, I wondered what my contribution would be. I settled on something near and dear to my heart — my 1955 International Harvester pickup truck, which I inherited from my dad many years ago and sat in my yard for a long time until one day the guys from Jay’s Service came out to pull my everyday vehicle out of a snowbank. They left with the International and an understanding that they’d work at it whenever they had some time.

That was six years ago. I check in on it every once in awhile and get an update from Jay, Evan and Richard on any progress. Sometimes there’s not much, sometimes quite a bit.

Anyway, this seemed like a good day to visit with my truck so I headed down to Jay’s Service and took a picture of Richard with the truck and submitted it to the http://www.kamloopsproject.ca website. I think maybe I’ll write about that, and other Kamloops Project stuff, in my Armchair Mayor column for Thursday. It’s been a great day — I haven’t had this much fun in awhile.

Media finally close in on TRU’s man of mystery

“Ah, but if less is more then just think how much more more would be.”

— Dr. Frasier Crane 

 

By the end of day, Kamloops will know more about Dr. Alan Shaver.

The man who will soon take over from Roger Barnsley at the head of Thompson Rivers University has been an unknown quantity to the Kamloops public since his appointment back in June.

First thing this morning, reporters will line up in room 209 of the Campus Activity Centre for interviews with the mystery man in a tightly scheduled series of one-on-ones (stick to the timeline, photos must be taken within the allotted interview time).

We know about his academic and administrative credentials — BSc. from Carleton, doctorate from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Dean of Science at McGill, vice president at Dalhousie.

But who is he, really? What kind of a leader will he be in a community that is joined at the hip to its university? On policy and leadership counts, we must wait and see.

Of more immediate interest are the attributes of accessibility and personal style.

On the first, Shaver would seem to prefer a controlled environment. With Barnsley, if you want to talk to him you phone him and he answers. With Shaver, it goes something like this: phone him and leave a voicemail; voicemail gets referred to VP advancement Christopher Seguin, who calls you back in a day or two to assess the request and tentatively pencils you in with Shaver for sometime next week; a few days later, media coordinator Diana Skoglund calls to put you in the schedule.

Total elapsed time: nine days.

Maybe Shaver will relax eventually, or maybe that’s the way they do things back east.

As for personal style, we do have some reconnaissance on that. An article on the Dalhousie News website a few years ago made note of Shaver’s pony tail.

“A self-confessed ‘child of the hippie era,’ Dr. Shaver still maintains his ponytail haircut even as his work finds him wearing suit jackets and ties along with it.”

I’m informed he got rid of the ponytail before arriving in Kamloops and has opted for more of a Frasier Crane look. My guess is that either he got some sage advice from Roger Barnsley, or he belatedly discovered that grown men should not wear ponytails.

Early appraisals judge Shaver as “reserved,” a marked contrast to Kathleen Scherf of “TRU rocks!” renown, whose tenure as president was abruptly cut short. In the teleconference piped into the Grand Hall during the announcement last June, he described himself as liking a good laugh.

“I like to have fun,” he said. “I like to enjoy people’s company. I like to work hard with people but it’s important that we have fun together. It’s important that we do things as a community and as a team.”

So, reserved in a fun way. And, the key “community” word.

His first goal, he said then, will be to listen. “I really believe in the democratic process of problem solution and administration.”

Another desirable attribute in TRU’s politically charged environment of sometimes-conflicting interests.

Can a chemist be the answer to TRU’s long and frustrating search for a successor to Roger Barnsley? Obviously, the board of governors thinks so.

And maybe today we’ll find out Alan Shaver’s golf handicap and if Frasier is his favourite TV show is.

 

HAIL THE FRIENDLY BUS DRIVER. Sally Cornies had this to say after Tuesday’s column about parking at RIH, in which I also mentioned the friendly but anonymous bus driver: “I had the pleasure of going to our emergency department last Saturday. . .  What do you do first? Worry about paying for your parking or try and get yourself thru triage as quickly as possible? …I fully understand having to pay for parking in the parkade, but emergency parking should be free and it should be user-friendly. Let’s try to make the trip to emergency a little less stressful.” And, on the friendly bus driver: “My 89-year-old mother had the pleasure of riding on his bus just after the write-up was in the paper. The driver made a point of introducing himself to his passengers and made sure they all knew who he was. He was giving them candy and joking with them. One of the stops on the route was a high school and mom said that there were a huge lot of kids waiting to get on the bus. The driver stopped the bus, got out, and proceeded to introduce himself to all the students just as he’d done with the other passengers.  Everyone got candy and everyone was laughing and joking and the kids showed a genuine appreciation for the driver. Mom said it was one of the best bus rides ever. I sure hope his employer realizes what a gem they have.”

mrothenburger@kamloopsnews.ca

http://www.armchairmayor.wordpress.com 

 

Some stamps and a donation please

I met a fellow on the corner of Seymour and Third the other day. He was staring down at the sidewalk.

“It’s OK, mayor,” he told me. “I can get it.”

He’d dropped a nickel and was trying to figure out how to pick it up without falling over. He explained he was a little drunk so I picked up the nickel and handed it to him.

Turns out his name was Mel, and he said he’d appreciate it if I could top up the nickel so I gave him a couple of bucks. I know it was wrong, but how can you refuse a guy who has the same first name as you? I don’t usually give to these folks because I know all the arguments about what they use the money for, but this time I made an exception.

Why, then, did I feel a momentary twinge of irritation when I was asked at the Post Office to make a donation to mental health? And, the next night, when a super market cashier asked if I’d like to give to the fight against breast cancer?

On the one hand, I give to somebody I shouldn’t, and, on the other, am not enthusiastic about giving to a couple of causes I should.

I think it might be the proliferation of checkout fundraising that caused my hesitation. I don’t consider myself a cheapskate. I give to United Way and to some favourite specific causes. I paid 40 bucks for an apple pie in support of the Food Bank a couple of weekends ago and was happy to do it.

I understand how competitive it is out there for charitable donations, especially this time of year. Come September-October, there are more charity golf tournaments and walks and runs than anyone can possibly take part in. There’s Parkinson’s, and MS, and brain injury and, of course, cancer.

There are so many cancer campaigns I fear that other great causes lose out a little up against the Terry Fox Run, the Run for the Cure, Relay for Life, and Pink Ribbon campaign, but how can you weigh one against another?

I learned a new term this week: “cause marketing.” That’s where corporations associate themselves with good causes. The cause benefits, and the corporation’s name is associated with doing good for the community.

Nothing wrong with that, that I can see. In fact, businesses are huge contributors to charity, and they deserve nothing but credit. But what should I do about all those checkout solicitations? I considered going through the list of agencies supported by the United Way, and if I’m asked at the checkout counter to donate to one that I’ve already donated to, directly or indirectly, simply saying, “No, thanks, I’ve already given to that charity.”

But I won’t do that, because, after all, we’re talking about a dollar or two. I get asked for donations maybe three times a week when I’m paying for groceries or buying stamps or picking up a bag of nails. That’s 50 cents a day, not including Sundays.

Even if I get hit up two or three times for the same cause, it’s not going to break the bank. So, rather than feeling like I should explain myself if I say no, I’ll continue to say okay and have a dollar or two deducted from my change. It’s easier and faster that way.

However, I would prefer if cashiers didn’t ask me to sign my name and give them my phone number so I can be entered in a draw. I never win draws, anyway.

And, I don’t really want my name displayed on a little sign that says “Mel gave to the Save the Chickens fund,” or whatever the cause happens to be.

The shortcoming of checkout donations is that they don’t really raise awareness about the cause or what the money will go toward. I guess it’s up to me to know where my donation is going.

I won’t be terribly disappointed when fundraisers move along to the next idea for raising donations. In the meantime, here’s a toonie.

DOWN IN THE TOMBS. Though I feel vindicated for questioning whether the City’s arts and culture manager needed to spend 10 days in China discussing whether a Ming Tombs exhibit would be coming to Kamloops, I’m not happy the project failed. It took five years to figure out our art gallery isn’t big enough for a collection of Ming Tombs artifacts to be sent here from Changping. Which is too bad, because the exhibit would have been a huge economic draw, not to mention just fun to see. Not so the replacement project — a “cultural” exchange of artists. Are we sliding back to the old cultural hook as a reason for partnerships with foreign cities? Just asking.

mrothenburger@kamloopsnews.ca

http://www.armchairmayor.wordpress.com

 

Why city folk, country folk don’t get along

In the fable about the city mouse and the country mouse, the two cousins love each other dearly but discover they don’t like each other’s lifestyles.

The city mouse finds country food not at all to his liking, and the country mouse isn’t fond of being chased by city dogs.

These days, the city mouse-country mouse disparity is called the urban-rural divide, and we’ve got lots of it. In my house, for example, we’re bitter about having to put up with dial-up Internet service while our friends in the City have as much high-speed as they can stand.

On our commute to work each day, we can tell when we’ve crossed the city boundary by the newly paved roads and roadside garbage pickup.

While much of it has to do with have and have-not issues, fact is there are simply different philosophies of life based on different ways of living.

The “divide” is evident everywhere you look these days. Last week, for example, urban council members squared off against their country cousins at the Union of B.C. Municipalities convention in Whistler over the issue of four-year terms.

Observers say it was one of the nastiest debates ever at the UBCM; some even say it proved the organization has become dysfunctional. That might be an exaggeration, but all accounts confirm the gloves came off.

Without over-simplifying it, urban representatives (including Kamloops City Council) favored four-year terms to save money on elections, while their rural counterparts argued against having to commit themselves for so many years.

After two days of debate, the country mice won.

Delta mayor Lois Jackson called it just another example of the urban-rural divide within the UBCM, which insiders say extends way beyond that one vote and deep into the executive of the organization.

This divide between city folk and country folk is becoming so entrenched that future elections may be fought over it. Prime Minister Stephen Harper tried to exploit it for political gain in the recent vote on the gun registry when he said the registry amounts to rural residents “being treated like criminals” by their urban cousins.

Liberal leader Michael Ignatieff has talked about re-inventing the country’s agricultural policies to help bridge the divide. He would do this by creating a national food policy “that puts more Canadian food on Canadian plates.”

Presumably, by providing farmers with more income security and city dwellers with more homegrown food, everybody would get along better.

Nothing illustrates the divide quite so clearly as health care, specifically the quality of health care enjoyed by city folk as compared to what country folk have to settle for. That battle has been waged on the pages of this newspaper for the past couple of weeks after an editorial suggested rural residents should be willing to trade local emergency care for a fast helicopter ride into town.

That didn’t go over well in places like Ashcroft and Clearwater. Comments have ranged from telling us to get our facts straight, to saying we should be ashamed of ourselves.

The divide between city and country has long been evident at the regional district level. The election of Kamloops mayor Peter Milobar to chair the Thompson-Nicola Regional District may have cooled animosity within the board for awhile, but the fundamentals are still there.

For decades, the TNRD has been marked by a Kamloops vs. The Rest relationship among directors. Some rural directors have harboured a passionate dislike of Kamloops for no other reason than that they can.

Beyond issues like health care and high-speed Internet, there doesn’t seem to be anything very rational about the urban-rural divide. Rural people think of themselves as self-sufficient types who enjoy a gentler, friendlier lifestyle free of rules, while urban people are all about sophistication and energy, and dog bylaws.

As Washington Post columnist Kathleen Parker wrote the other day, “Those who have opted to live in densely populated areas need third-party authorities to maintain order and figure they’ll trade a little freedom for the convenience and cultural riches of city life.”

Somewhere, sometime, the twain shall meet, a sentiment well expressed in a comment on a website that debated the issue: “I spent most of my life living in the city, and for the past few years I’ve been living in the country. The country folk around here have the same comforts and conveniences that city folk have. The only difference is they have a longer commute to work.

“As for farmers, well, I think the modern farmer would be lost and helpless without his high-tech machines.”

mrothenburger@kamloopsnews.ca

http://www.armchairmayor.wordpress.com

Court decision on prostitution full of holes

I wonder if we’ll ever make up our minds in this country what we want to do about prostitution.

Far from being the triumph for enlightenment an Ontario judge’s ruling is being hailed as this week, it’s further evidence of the muddled, fuzzy headed state of so-called liberal progressives, matched only by the punitive mindset of the conservative minded.

Those who promote the interests of prostitution under the banner of safety for sex workers are so contradictory in their messages I despair for any possibility of rational debate or a practical solution.

Rather than bringing any clarity or sense of direction to the prostitution issue, Justice Susan Himel’s decision epitomizes our national befuddlement. Himel ruled that current laws making communication for the purposes of prostitution, keeping a common bawdy house, and living off the avails (that’s “pimping” to you and me), are unconstitutional.

“By increasing the risk of harm to street prostitutes, the communicating law is simply too high a price to pay for the alleviation of social nuisance,” Himel wrote in her decision.

“I find that the danger faced by prostitutes greatly outweighs any harm which may be faced by the public.”

To listen to the three sex-trade workers who brought the challenge to court, this is a great victory for the welfare of society. Two of them are prostitutes, the third is a Toronto dominatrix who goes by the professional name of Madame de Sade.

Apparently, we’re expected to give credibility to a woman whose business is bondage and sexual humiliation, and who said she intended to celebrate her victory in court by “spanking some ass.”

While Himel’s decision is intended to increase safety for hookers, it does the opposite.

Self-righteous columnists and commentators who paint themselves as socially with it like to point out that prostitution is not illegal in Canada, smugly declaring this to be some sort of legislative incongruity.

In fact, the law on communication is a smart, practical way to prosecute those who live off the sex trade. Instead of going around trying to catch people in the act of having sex and proving money was exchanged, police use the communication law. In Kamloops, RCMP frequently carry out sting operations in which undercover officers pretend to be either hookers or johns, arresting those who seek to buy or sell sex.

Himel says sex workers would be safer if they could work inside, so brothels shouldn’t be illegal. But removing the law against communicating for the purposes of prostitution would massively increase street prostitution, putting more hookers in danger and creating greater risk to the public via more sidewalk harassment, drug dealing and street crime.

The judge believes making pimping legal will allow prostitutes to hire security. Maybe, but it will also open up the gates on recruitment and exploitation of women, and the violence that goes with it.

Though prostitution laws are outside its authority, the City of Kamloops has its own contradictions: while funding harm-reduction programs for prostitutes, it pulls the business licences of massage parlours suspected of operating as brothels.

City councils will find themselves dealing with a whole new set of neighbourhood zoning issues if Himel’s decision is upheld and spreads across the country.

The greatest contradiction of all, though, is our inability to make up our minds whether we should embrace the sex trade, try to manage it, or continue the unending struggle to eliminate or at least limit it.

Those in the trade are as confused as anyone about this. While it’s currently de rigueur for sex-trade workers to regard themselves as victims, I’ve also sat in on a few panel discussions in which they’re loud and proud about what they do. That’s fine, but which is it?

If prostitution is a bad thing, and we’d be better off without it, why is there such celebration in the sex trade over a court ruling that would have the effect of perpetuating and even expanding it?

Public opinion polls fairly consistently show half of Canadians support decriminalizing prostitution; half want the status quo. We remain, as a country, without consensus.

This week’s court decision leaves only a potential vacuum; it does nothing to help find practical solutions.

mrothenburger@kamloopsnews.ca

http://www.armchairmayor.wordpress.com