HAVE YOUR SAY:

Tim Campbell is to be commended for his series of articles on head injuries and concussions -- very illuminating and timely.

I agreed with the letter from Bob Fisher of Winnipeg, who suggested the body armour hockey players wear be reduced to the sort of padding worn a number of years ago, shoulder and elbow padding that gave only minimal protection. This might give players pause before using their bodies as battering rams against others. Without question, something has to be done to reduce the increasing number of head injuries.

Laurie Logan

Winnipeg

�ñº

The discussion about concussions in hockey could not come at a more appropriate time for our family. Last month our 11-year-old suffered a concussion after receiving a two-handed blow to the head causing his head to smash against the ice. He did not have the puck and play was already clearing the zone. There was no call by the ref. Though the minor hockey association voices a strong zero-tolerance policy on hits to the head, correspondence over the incident to the organization has resulted in no acknowledgment. I echo Bob McKenzie's opinion that it has to start at the grassroots level. Minor hockey associations are negligent of condoning this type of play if they do not enforce these rules. Stated expectations might as well not be stated if they are not enforced.

Alison Loschiavo

Winnipeg

Freedom from religion

Re: Funding faith-based colleges (March 10). Once again, as in the Youth For Christ proposal, the Free Press has come out in favour of public money supporting religious institutions. I recognize that our government has a history of providing funding to faith-based schools, but this is the direction we should be moving away from, not increasing the amounts or extending this to other institutions. Religion needs to be kept separate from the public sphere.

In light of the recognition that immigration to our country is changing the demographics of the population, including the religious beliefs, I do not think the government should be in the business of financially supporting any particular religion. It is only because Christianity is still the dominant religion that these types of decisions are made. I would be very surprised to see the majority come out in favour of supporting a University of Scientology or a Pagan School of Wicca. Freedom from religion is just as important as freedom of religion.

Diana Goods

Winnipeg

Careless editorial

Your editorial Parks serve us all (March 9) on the Tim Hortons camp in Whiteshell Provincial Park was careless. The Whiteshell is not "massive," but it is fragile.

Tim Hortons original plan was percolated in secrecy and sought to foreclose on the wilderness of the Meditation Lake canoe route in order to, ironically, build a "wilderness" camp. It was us "purists" who convinced Tim Hortons that Meditation Lake was eutrophic, something months of secrecy overlooked. Your editorial's contempt for us should at least include some credit for our efforts.

The fact there are six other Tim Hortons camps in Canada is not as significant as the fact there are already five accredited camps in the Whiteshell that offer outdoor experiences to disadvantaged children. Tim Hortons will need another road and another hydro line to be paid for by taxpayers at a cost of $1.2 million. In return, its 17-hectare camp essentially becomes private property.

Your comments that there is "so much untouched land" in the Whiteshell "that the province has not had to develop a comprehensive policy" on development is remarkably uninformed. The Parks Branch is required by legislation to update the management plans for our parks every 10 years. The plan for the Whiteshell in which you demonstrate so much faith is almost 20 years overdue. Building the Tim Hortons camp will be executed in a planning and policy vacuum.

Stop your editorial cheerleading until you spend more time researching than writing. Start with a few interviews of the "purists."

C. Hugh Arklie

Dugald

�ñº

The purposes of the provincial park system, according to the province, are: (a) to conserve ecosystems and maintain biodiversity; (b) to preserve unique and representative natural, cultural and heritage resources; (c) to provide outdoor recreational and educational opportunities and experiences in a natural setting.

I disagree with the contention that the Tim Hortons camp "easily meets the test."

Stuart Kaye

Winnipeg

Threat to Israel

I endorse David Matas's comments expressing opposition to Israeli Apartheid Week. Exploiting the language of human rights to legitimize a campaign to demonize and delegitimize the state of Israel, which the promoters of IAW are doing, constitutes what Gerald Steinberg, chairman of the political studies department at Bar Ilan University, has termed "lawfare" and represents a far more serious existential threat to Israel than warfare. Under the guise of support for the rights of Palestinians, IAW's accusations and promotion of the boycott, divestment and sanctions campaign against Israel ultimately constitute a denial of the right of Israel to exist, which is itself a crime against humanity.

The tragedy of this situation is that the very mechanisms and language of human rights that were created in response to the destruction of the Jews during the Holocaust are now being used against them.

Penny Jones Square

Tyndall

�ñº

Re: Organizers try to keep temperatures low (March 10). I cannot believe that in today's climate that Canada and the University of Manitoba would consider to let such a blatant expression of anti-Semitism to permeate logical society with Israel Apartheid Week. Israel is a Jewish state. Anything against Israel is anti-Semitic. The subtext is evident.

Israel, the only democracy in the Middle East, is a modern miracle located in a region mired in decay and values not shared by civilized societies. Israel is surrounded by violent enemies sworn to annihilate it. But nothing is said about the enemies of Israel. No discussion is taking place on the terror. There is no outcry about honour killings, public stonings, suicide bombers.

Instead the university deems it important to call for a week of discussions about Israeli apartheid. Instead of this verbal diarrhea, why not a discussion on how the Arab world treats the Palestinians, a topic much more relevant to the real problem?

In view of the fact that Winnipeg is the host city for the Canadian Museum for Human Rights it is sadly laughable that such a racist and one-sided discussion is being allowed to take place. Welcome to Durban, Canada.

Hannon Bell

Winnipeg

Fluffy's Law a hit

Re: Avrom Charach's Your pet, my problem (March 6). Charach's first misconception is that Fluffy's Law strips landlords of their freedom to choose tenants. The bill still allows landlords to choose whom to contract with. In fact, Fluffy's Law has been in place for 20 years in Ontario and hasn't prevented Ontario landlords from screening tenants.

Current Manitoba law is silent with respect to allergies caused by pets. Fluffy's Law protects the health of tenants by providing that a pet can be removed if it causes serious allergies to another tenant or to the landlord. Fluffy's Law goes two steps further by also giving landlords tools to remove tenants when pets are noisy, unclean, inherently dangerous or interferes with the reasonable enjoyment of the unit by others. The bill allows landlords to establish reasonable rules concerning the cleanliness and control of pets.

Manitobans are supporting Fluffy's Law in droves. Our Facebook group, "I support Fluffy's Law" has over 3,500 fans and we have collected more than 2,000 petition signatures supporting the bill.

Jon Gerrard

Manitoba Liberal Party

Republished from the Winnipeg Free Press print edition March 13, 2010 A19