 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
|
4925-48
Street
Camrose, AB, Canada
T4V 1L7
Phone:
(780)672-3142
Fax:
(780)672-2518
E-mail:
ads@camrosebooster.com
or
news@camrosebooster.com
Site
update occurs
each Wednesday
Letters are welcomed but please limit them to 500 words or less and sign with first name, initial, surname, address and phone number. Letters to third parties are not accepted.
Dear Editor:
Re: Government insensitive to low-paid workers
The age in which we live could hardly be described as conducive to a sensitiveness of the needs of low-paid Alberta workers by the Stelmach government with the freeze imposed on the minimum wage announced by the Hon. Thomas Lukaszuk, recently appointed Minister of Employment and Immigration.
On the one hand during this temporary economic downturn our country is experiencing, others in both the private and public sectors in our province with the privilege of having a union collective bargaining process are enjoying up to six percent increases in pay. On the other hand we have many low paid workers in our service industries which all Albertans rely on who have no organization or union to negotiate wage increases nor benefits who are totally relying on the minimum wage legislation to eke out a minimal standard of living in our province.
Early in the 1940s, the governing Social Credit Party realizing that some employers were exploiting their employees introduced minimum wage legislation that provided bare-bones existence for many Albertans. No major changes took place for many years until soon after his successful bid for the leadership of his governing Party, Premier Stelmach introduced an increase of one dollar in the minimum wage in 2007 to $8 an hour and in taking politics out of minimum wage increases, tied in future annual increases to the province’s average annual weekly earnings index. The same index which provides the annual increases to the members of the Legislative Assembly and which Edmonton City Councillors in 2006 adopted for themselves. Many minimum wage earners were exalted in what they believed was fairness on their government’s part.
Contrary to Minister Lukaszuk’s comments as reported in the February 6th Journal why freezing the minimum wage was necessary, there is no evidence since such policy was introduced over half a century ago, that, having a minimum wage even during stressing economic times, had any effect on the province’s unemployment rate nor that any small businesses went into bankruptcy because of such policy.
The government’s actions truly has violated the fundamental duty of fairness under our democratic system and denying minimum wage earners the meager 12 cents an hour increase they were to receive this year from the policy change introduced only three years ago is shameful to say the least. The government should immediately rescind the increase and have the Minister appoint the all Party committee he inferred to. BUT, the big question in the minds of many Albertans, and in particular the minimum wage earners is "Why interfere with the policy change introduced that has worked well and has proven to be fairly in place today?"
Elsie Marlowe,
Former County of Camrose
Dear Editor:
Give credit where credit is due
On behalf of my family and myself, it is with great gratitude we recognize the professionalism and competence of the Camrose Ambulance Service who tended to me here and delivered me safe and sound to the Royal Alex Hospital.
They also had alerted our daughters who were waiting at the hospital when we arrived. The surgeon and staff gave me immediate attention and were excellent caregivers during my stay. One is unaware of the excellent professional services we have until they are needed.
Our thanks is certainly extended to the Camrose Ambulance Service and the cardiology staff at the Royal Alexandra Hospital.
Joyce Wilcox
Camrose
Dear Editor:
I no longer live in Camrose but did for a number of years. I still keep in touch with the many wonderful friends I made in Camrose over the years. I use Facebook to help with communication, but was shocked and disgusted to find an "I F***ing Hate (student's name)" group started by a future 2010 grad of the Camrose Composite High School. I only know this as her name and school were displayed. A majority of the students had listed their schools and year of graduation.
As I went through the list of members that totaled 66 on the weekend (as I write, it is up to 77), I saw remarks left by students from Camrose, Daysland, and surrounding area. All the remarks, with the exception of one student, were extremely cruel. This one student was brave enough to tell the rest they were pathetic in doing this group. The girl who started this group talked about wanting to punch the person she hated in the face. Another student mentioned someone else they would like to start a hate group on; still another admitted they had started a hate group on someone, but it had been deleted. I recognized numerous last names so no family is better than another in this instance.
I have e-mailed the school and reported this girl for Cyber bullying on Facebook as I notice numerous postings were done on school time. Since all these kids are underage, who is monitoring their movements on the computer? On their I-Phones? On anything that gives them access to Facebook or other communication? It is not the school's responsibility in this as most schools have banned Facebook from their computers. Unfortunately, it will be the school who deals with the fall-out if the child getting cyber-bullied decides to act in a manner that may hurt himself or others. Who makes these kids responsible for their actions? And, who is responsible if this child getting bullied reacts?
Lynn K. Mohninger
Lamont
Dear Editor:
In our National Anthem, we often sing "O Canada The True North Strong and Free."
But, are we free? (The word free means "With no obligation.")
We are free to elect our members of parliament and city council (from a list of names chosen by a few in the upper echelon). Yes, but after they are elected that is the last word we get. From there on, they tell us what we can and cannot do.
That is what they call Freedom.
We may buy a home with no mortgage involved. But, when do we truly own the house? We are obligated to pay taxes, which the town or city council has set. The City tells us "Just pay the taxes that we have set, or your residence will be sold for unpaid taxes."
We are obligated to pay GST on everything from heating to talking on the phone. We may buy a car, on which we are obligated to pay a big tax for the gas to run it on, the new tires we may need to buy, on all the repairs, insurance, driver's license, license plates etc., etc.
We are even under obligation to pay a tax on preparations for death.
Bearing in mind that Freedom means "without obligation," are we in reality, "The True North Strong and Free"?
Mary E Warke
Camrose
Dear Editor:
If evolution isn't the only view, then why is it the only one being taught in schools?
Why do kids have to only learn about evolution as a fact when it has been proven only to be someone's theory?
I don't see why creation isn't being taught in the schools when it has been around longer than the theory of evolution.
If kids are only learning about one view and there is more than one view, then how can kids make a decision on what to believe?
If I was only taught one way to do math and not shown any other way, then I might be missing out on a method that would make more sense to me.
I think that evolution and creation should be taught in schools so that kids can make an honest decision on what to believe.
Brianna Hennig,
11 years old,
Camrose
