Prince of Wales Bridge: Why Isn't This a Bikeway

(click on image to enlarge)

As early as 2005, after the rail line was discontinued and the City of Ottawa purchased the bridge for possible future public transit use the NCC proposed using the bridge as a pedestrian and cycling bridge (Wikipedia: The Ottawa Citizen. (15 November 2005), NCC plans to link Ottawa, Gatineau with new recreation paths).

Since then the bridge has sat idle, although I assume, since the city purchased it for future public transit use, it's structural integrity has been maintained.

Such a shame. All those wasted years when the cost to use it as a Bikeway, even if temporary, would be minimal and if action had been taken in 2005 we'd be getting to close to ten years of use now. But it is never too late to do the right thing.

(click on image to enlarge)

All that would be needed is for a wooden boardwalk with railings to be built over the steel rails and approaches connected from the recreational pathways that are already on both sides of the Ottawa River. The timing is ideal with the newly built O-Train Multi-User Path (MUP) following the rest of the rail line on the Ottawa side all the way to the recreational pathway along the Rideau Canal. This would make an ideal link in the region's pathway system. The minimal cost would justify the expense, even if temporary, and it could be another ten years, if ever, before the bridge is used for public transit.

It is time for our elected, and unelected, officials to find ways through the bureaucratic roadblocks and make this happen for the citizens of Ottawa and Gatineau.

(click on image to enlarge)
Photo Source

Why I Believe Rob Ford

I believe Rob Ford was telling the truth because of what he did not say.

He did not say:

I have never used crack cocaine.

And he did not say:

There is no video of me appearing to use crack cocaine because I have never been in a situation where I appeared to be using crack cocaine.

So, because of what he did not say, I believe that Rob Ford was telling the truth, very carefully.

The Rob Ford Scenarios

So what are the possible explanations for the infamous Rob Ford video. Rob Ford says it is just ridiculous, but beyond that he offers no explanation. So we are left to our own speculation. But there must be some explanation for the fact that the journalists that saw it thought that it was indeed Rob Ford, so let us look at the possible scenarios.

The Ford Nation Conspiracy Theory Scenario

Its all a conspiracy by Somali drug lords, American media, The Toronto Star, the NDP, CUPE and the Toronto Cyclists Union to discredit the man they hate the most.

The Sophisticated Video Editing Scenario

A group of low level drug dealers produced a sophisticated fake video appearing to be Rob Ford smoking crack.

The Stumbled Upon a Rob Ford Look-alike Scenario

A group of Toronto druggies just happened to know someone who looked like Rob Ford and thought it would be fun to make a spoof video and one of them had the idea to try to sell it to the media for big bucks.

The Fooling Around With His Football Team Scenario

Rob Ford was at a party with some of his beloved minority football players and thought it would be cool to pretend to be smoking crack cocaine and somebody made a video.

The It Is What It Appears To Be Scenario

Just that. That it is what it appears to be.

Mayor Jimmy Really Doesn’t Get It

The following twitter exchange exemplifies Mayor Jimmy's petty reaction to criticism.

I suppose I should be thankful I have not been blocked yet, like so many of the mayor's critics.

Jim Watson ‏@JimWatsonOttawa
Pleased to join @Eli_Ward5 and @AllanHubley_23 and Cyril Leeder at Tanger Outlet ground breaking in Kanata
pic.twitter.com/RXzKKT46gZ

Richard W. Woodley ‏@the5thColumnist
@JimWatsonOttawa @AllanHubley_23 @Eli_Ward5
paving farmland and clearcutting forests sure makes our mayor happy and proud #developersrule

Jim Watson ‏@JimWatsonOttawa
@the5thColumnist and where do you live? Oh yes, a former farmers field.

What can I take from this but the suggestion that somehow anyone who lives on what used to be farmland or wilderness has no right to oppose the inappropriate development of farmland or environmentally sensitive lands. That is a pretty neat trick to basically take away the rights of anyone who lives in a city, in this case the city of Ottawa, to oppose the development of farmland or environmental lands. After all, most cities, including Ottawa, started as rural agricultural areas and before that was wilderness.

But no, because we might live on what was once farmland or wilderness does not take away our rights to be concerned about and oppose inappropriate development.

Mayor Jimmy may want to label us as crazy environmentalists who should all live in cabins in the bush but we are not against cities and development but rather understand that boundaries need to be set, and rules need to be followed, to allow for appropriate development, and appropriate development is not defined as whatever developers want.

Does Mayor Jimmy really expect home buyers to determine what lands are developed by their purchasing choices made after the fact. Does he really think that would work. That people will not buy houses that are already built because they think they should not have been built there, knowing their decisions will not bring the farmland or wilderness back. Does he really think he can transfer the responsibility for proper decision making by the authorities who actually have power to the virtually powerless consumers of these mega corporations' housing developments.

It is the responsibility of the political authorities at the federal, provincial and municipal levels to set limits and establish priorities to protect agricultural land environmental lands. And as more land becomes developed and agricultural and environmental lands become scarcer it becomes more important to protect them. We need to strengthen, not weaken these protections. We need to be more vigilant, not less vigilant, in enforcing the rules.

Politicians, like Mayor Jimmy, need to take these responsibilities seriously and not dismiss criticism in a petty way simply because it is expressed by people who actually live in the City of Ottawa, the people they are supposed to represent.

Interregnum

Well it's been awhile, Even though I have had blog post ideas going through my bead I just have not felt like sitting down and writing lately. The Fifth Column will resume even if I am not certain exactly when.

If a Tree Falls in the Forest is it not Canadian if it Originated in Norway

I remember way back when when I was in school, not back in the days of the one room schoolhouse but back in the days of the eight classroom schoolhouse with one class for each grade when everyone walked to school, learning about maple trees and maple leaves. We learned about the Norway Maple, and that it's name came from it's origins in Norway but I do not recall learning that it was an evil illegal alien that should not be identified with anything Canadian such as our currency.

Rogers and Me Part 2: When You Have A Monopoly I Guess You Don't Have to Tell Your Customers What They Are Paying For

After my original attempts to get Rogers to answer my questions via e-mail failed I posted my questions to Google Drive (originally Google Docs) and tweeted the location to them and finally got answers via Twitter, 140 characters at a time.

That brought me to the next stage of the decision making process, which was deciding between the Digital Plus and VIP packages. So that should be easy - go to the Rogers website and see just what the differences between the two packages are. Not so easy I discovered. I expected to find a listing and description of the Basic package, and then what Digital Plus adds, and then what VIP adds. But it does not work that way. They only list the full complement of channels for each package and you have to go through them yourself to determine just what additional channels you get with the each package and then you only have a list of names. So then I went looking on the Rogers web site to find descriptions of the channels they wanted me to pay to subscribe to, without success so, I tweeted @RogersHelps again, resulting in this exchange.

Richard W. Woodley ‏@the5thColumnist @RogersHelps is there a place on your website where I can find a DESCRIPTION of all the channels in the VIP package, not just list of names

Nicolas @ Rogers ‏@RogersNicolas @the5thColumnist Hi Richard, I'm afraid we don't have a description of each channel individually.

Richard W. Woodley ‏@the5thColumnist @RogersNicolas rather astounding that you can't provide customers with a description of what you're trying to sell to them @RogersHelps

So I did my own research and made my own list which I posted to Google Drive here and I am still considering my options. But it is rather astounding that they expect people to buy a package without knowing it's contents, and more so that they can get away with it. The power of a monopoly.

The Teachers Dilemma

Nobody wants to give in to a bully. Indeed teachers teach students not to give in to bullies and teachers are expected to be role models and teach by example.

So the teachers, when the bully took away their collective bargaining rights with draconian legislation that took away their right to strike, used the only legal avenue they had to fight back against the bully and refused voluntary activities.

They knew the government had pushed them into a corner so that their only legal way of fighting back would impact students and keep them from doing things they loved to do. I am sure they were looking individually and collectively for a way to bring things back to normal for their students while still taking a stand against the bully government.

When they found another way to make a last stand against the government with minimal impact on students, Dalton McGuinty said no that is illegal, the only protests we will allow you to undertake are ones that harm your students.

So what next.

Teachers Political Protest Not a Strike and Not Illegal

First of all it is not a strike because it is not part of the collective bargaining process because with a government imposed contract, imposed under a draconian law whose constitutionality is under challenge, there is no collective bargaining process. Secondly the political protest is aimed at the government as policy maker and legislator, not as employer.

It is not illegal because political protests are not illegal in Canada, even if Stephen Harper and Dalton McGuinty wish they were.

Not that the teachers are completely free of consequences. For one they will not be paid for the day, and secondly their contract provisions may provide for discipline for absences not approved by the employer. But any such action will be subject to the grievance and appeal provisions of their contracts. That being said the usual discipline by employers for such absences is suspension from work without pay. So theoretically the school boards could force the teachers to take time off work without pay as punishment for taking time off work without pay. Sort of like suspending students for truancy.

The biggest irony, or perhaps more appropriately described as hypocrisy, is that Dalton McGuinty has his knickers in a knot over teachers taking a day off without pay to protest a process that has imposed a contract on them that requires them to take days off without pay.

The Fatal Weakness of the United States Constitution Bill of Rights

Americans love their Constitution and beloved Bill of Rights. However it has one fatal weakness in that it's provisions are unrestricted without the requirement that such rights as freedom of assembly and speech and the right to bear arms be exercised responsibly. This leads to the inability to restrict hate speech including the desecration of funerals by lunatics claiming to be acting on behalf of god, as well as the inability to prevent the unfettered ownership and use of weapons, including the use of military assault weapons to kill innocent children.

What the American Bill of Rights needs is a "reasonable limits clause", such as is provided in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

1.The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms guarantees the rights and freedoms set out in it subject only to such reasonable limits prescribed by law as can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society.