Letters, Sept. 19

Hey there, time traveller!
This article was published 19/09/2023 (950 days ago), so information in it may no longer be current.

Time to change the rules

Re: Housing fund just one piece of the puzzle (Think Tank, Sept. 17)

It’s true, in order for more housing to be accommodated in existing neighborhoods, people in those neighborhoods should stop opposing it and rather appreciate the benefits to the city at large. Unfortunately however, this is a little like asking people to warmly embrace higher taxes for good causes — it’s appropriate, but not likely to happen.

What really needs to happen is to simply change the rules. Our decision-making system for allowing new housing in existing neighborhoods currently encourages NIMBY voices to oppose, while leaving the mess of such decisions in the hands of just one (or three at best) city councillors — an unfair ask!

Rather, we should just change the rules to allow denser housing types in existing neighborhoods by right so that the housing policies already in place can be properly fulfilled. We should use corners and corridors and lanes to build more housing without extra permissions, and — here’s the controversial part — do it without continuously asking neighbourhoods if they want it, because they likely won’t.

They say crisis creates opportunity for change. We are currently are in a housing crisis — use the opportunity to change the rules and let’s get on with it.

Donovan Toews

Winnipeg

 

Loss of a hidden gem

Re: The Cross leaves a legacy of kindness (Sept. 11)

Thank you, Mr. Birkett, for your honest and thoughtful article on the closing of Our Place/Chez Nous. As someone who walked “the strip” and knew the community, your words painted a perfect picture of the outreach centre. The philosophy of this Catholic run drop-in was to welcome everyone with respect and compassion. The volunteers were devoted to the service they provided, and it takes a special commitment to work in that environment.

I visited Chez Nous on the last day before their summer break and was truly impressed with how clean, organized and well managed it appeared. One felt a sense of love for the street people they served. Its closing is a sign of the times, as street life grows more desperate and volunteers age out, with fewer bodies stepping up to fill in their shoes.

Instead of seeing these small personal centres close, there should be some way to support them, so they can in turn, support the most needy of our city.

Joyce Loftson

Winnipeg

 

Good money after bad

Re: Prescription for dysfunction (Sept. 15)

The piece by Chris Kitching merely scratches the surface of our health-care manpower dilemma in Canada. The shortage of specialists, especially in the surgical sphere, is far worse and much more serious than the shortage of primary physicians in Canada. This is the real cause of the long wait lists. Unlike the primary physician shortage; this is caused, not by bygone mistakes, but by contemporary factors. This is unrelated to the dreadful 1980s strategy to limit medical school admissions.

Unlike the paucity of medical school graduates, which causes the shortage of primary physicians, there is actually an enormous glut of young specialist graduates. Most of them can’t find a hospital to work in. Hospitals are on a fixed budget and cannot afford funding the needs of new recruits. New specialists are added only when someone retires. Hence, 90 per cent of them are forced to find practice opportunities elsewhere – usually in the U.S. This enormous shortage of specialists could be remedied overnight by opening more hospital appointments.

Why do we train all these people if we are never going to offer them a place to work?

Furthermore, in our system, a teacher in a medical specialty has to protect his personal access to facilities, like operating room time and hospital beds. An additional staff member would encroach on his need to conserve critical resources for his own needs.

This is why the private clinics in Winnipeg are all failing and most have already closed. You cannot recruit specialists if there is no hospital willing to give them privileges.

The conundrum lies with the system. Canada has abandoned the free enterprise system of healthcare. The fee for service system of the 60s and 70s offered incentives, freedom of choice, robust competition, high productivity, and unlimited freedom to expand. There were no wait lists. Why did they take all this away from us?

I see hundreds of lawn signs in Wab Kinew’s Fort Rouge riding that say, “Healthcare is Horrendous.” There is no argument about that! This cannot be fixed by throwing more money at a system that is so fatally flawed and getting worse every year.

The solution can only be found if we return to universal insurance and a free enterprise delivery system.

Henry P. Krahn, M.D.

Winnipeg

 

Kudos to Chris Kitching for his excellent article.

It’s sad to read that throughout the 1980s and 1990s both the NDP and Progressive Conservatives cut health care spending. So we are now faced with a dysfunctional health-care system. And yet the current government is still throwing money at other items. If you can’t get out of bed, or you can’t walk, or you are in constant pain, what good is getting rid of the PST on restaurant meals?

In my view, the current PC MLAs, don’t have the wherewithal to turn around our sinking health-care system. Perhaps that’s why former premier Brian Pallister cut and ran! They didn’t have the foresight to realize that an aging population, and an increased population will require more resources, not less resources. Medical professionals are needed everywhere.

They can pick and choose where they want to practice. And for them to succeed they need efficient and timely diagnostic resources to support them. Good intentions don’t solve problems. It becomes critical to be able to execute the change our health-care system desperately needs. And our current government has not shown that it can’t do it. And a lousy health-care system affects those on the right, left or centre.

Barry Elkin

Winnipeg

 

Back to the office

Re: Remote work positive for city, staff, report finds (Sept. 15)

City councillors are absolutely right to “question if remote workers are really as productive at home as they could be at the office.” How did the report come to this conclusion — it asked the workers! Ridiculous.

There are 168 hours in a week — we only need the city workers to show up for 40 — and they can’t even do that? Of course they feel they are “more productive” when they are emptying the dishwasher while on a conference call — I get it. The workers also claim to be saving time on their (so very long — maybe 15 minutes) commutes, as if we are in Toronto or Vancouver.

The HR director for the city seems to be under the misguided notion that there is “more collaboration” under this model. I’d like to hear more about how they are building their culture on Zoom and how young workers are getting the mentorship and leadership they need while their boss is “multitasking” from their backyard.

When the CAO talks about using this as a model to “attract and retain” workers, he needs to ask himself, are these really the type of employees we want? Working from home may be “positive” for city workers … but it’s not so great for the taxpayers funding their salaries!

Derek Rolstone

Winnipeg