Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Who we are - Qui nous sommes
- PCGM - GMPC
- Like it or not, the combined forces of climate change and oil depletion mean we will all have to live with a lot less fossil fuel-based energy in the future. This has widespread implications for our way of life. Our group wants to help Greater Monctonians prepare for what could be a tricky transition. We are about: Food sovereignty, Active and public transportation, Energy efficiency, Education & Awareness +++ Qu'on le veuille ou non, l'effet combiné des changements climatiques et de l'épuisement du pétrole signifie que l'on devra à l'avenir composer avec beaucoup moins d'énergies fossiles. Cela suppose des changements considérables à notre mode de vie. Le but de notre groupe est d'aider les citoyens du Grand Moncton à se préparer à une transition qui pourrait s'avérer périlleuse. Nous sommes centrés sur : la souveraineté alimentaire, le transport actif et collectif, l'efficacité énergétique, l'éducation et la sensibilisation.
Alternative Energy - Énergies alternatives
2 comments:
I forwarded your blog to the mayor and my city councilors urging them to view this video. I was in turn urged to write a letter to the editor of the Time & Transcript supporting the decision on establishing the bike lanes. Hopefully you'll be able to read the full uncut version in an upcoming issue.
I also heard you speak on the radio this morning. Your arguments are all relevant and quite clear, but I think we need to tweak the way we tackle this issue to try and, if not convert the people opposing this idea, to at leas help them understand it only makes sense for the greater good.
I think the argument needs to be debated in the only language most people understand; money. How much it costs and who actually pays for it. It will be a shock to some that think they own the road when they realize they likely contribute little funding infrastructure, while city dwellers that rarely use the roads likely contribute a much greater amount.
Here is one paragraph from my letter to the editor that I think clearly spells it out...
"I've been reading some of the commentary regarding bike lanes, and I am baffled at the categorization of this decision as "unjust." Some of the arguments put forward have no basis in reason. In particular, saying that cyclists don't contribute to the cost of road development and maintenance - and therefore have no right to a piece of those roads - is comical if not downright stupid. Cyclists, because they choose not to drive cars either occasionally or full-time, aren't full-fledged citizens? Think they don't pay taxes? It may surprise some to learn that roads are not funded solely out of motor vehicle registration fees. Let's get things straight: municipal property taxes are a significant source of funding for roadways, and it's not just property (and car) owners who pay those taxes. Renters (and why assume it's renters who are the only cyclists?) have a significant tax burden as well, given that their landlords aren't eligible for the provincial property tax rebate and pass that cost along through rents. All of us pay taxes, and a significant portion of those taxes funds our roads.
We all have a right to use them to get places, no matter our choice of vehicle."
Thank you jEPH. We appreciate your positive and constructive feedback. Looking forward to reading your piece to the editor of the TT. The paper seems to have toned down its rhetoric in this morning's edition (Sat). We suspect it's because they are starting to realize they misread
public opinion on this matter.
Post a Comment