Letters, April 21

The demise of delivery

Re: Advocate says end of door-to-door mail delivery will be ‘isolating’ for seniors (April 19); Phasing out of door-to-door mail delivery sinks in for Winnipeggers (April 17)

I have been taking in reports of Canada Post’s plans to end door-to-door services over the last couple of years, in an effort to stay afloat financially.

Catherine Morrison’s piece April 19, as well as Tyler Searle’s reporting on April 17 piqued my interest.

For people to be so out of touch with the rest of the country boggles the mind. Yes, if you have always had home delivery, it will be an adjustment, I can appreciate that. However, for the population living in the geographic majority of Canada, that service has been a pipe dream. Most are hoping they can keep Canada Post delivery — period.

Rural citizens, no matter their age and/or abilities areas have had to go to a Community Post office or post box setup for at least 60 years if not more. Those residents have figured it out, asking friends or family. Yes, we should be “appreciative” we even have this service because “we chose to live here.”

But in my area, we are grateful for a pittance of service, because we know the alternative — having to go even farther out of the community. I live 80 kilometres west of Winnipeg on Highway 2, hardly “off the grid.”

A nation-wide postal service is essential. But everyone must pitch in to ensure its viability and sustainability.

Joanne Gilbraith

St. Claude

It is with mixed feelings that I read your news coverage of Canada Post’s plans to end door to door mail delivery..

Growing up in rural Canada, we walked to the local post office to get our mail. Moving to live in the city, I discovered the mail was delivered to the house, or apartment block, where I have lived. In rural areas, the local post office served as a place to meet neighbours, and check in with one another as to how things were going for our families.

In the city, having the postal worker come by the house served to keep the neighborhood safe, since he or she acted as “eyes” in the community. If mail went unattended for several days, once in the mailbox, the mail carrier would check to see if everything was OK, because they, too, were our neighbour and friend.

The introduction of centralized mail box delivery in recent years has lead to the loss of having a trusted friend and neighbor keeping “eyes” on the community, and the loss of the mail carrier service in the region of Winnipeg that has been slated for change to centralized mail box delivery will indeed be a loss to folks in that area of our community. Already an area of the city under stress from a multitude of social problems, now there will be one less trusted person on their daily walk to keep the neighbourhood safe.

So, while it is understandable that change must come, or so it seems, it is also understandable why folks feel abandoned by a once trusted government service. Let’s hope we find a way to replace this loss in the communities being affected by the changes that are coming our way.

Carole Zoerb

Winnipeg

Keep cats inside

As I move around the city, I notice many stray cats scurrying outside. For instance, neighbourhoods like Wolseley are prime examples of this behaviour. While riding my bike I recently counted a dozen cats freely roaming around Wolseley.

The city’s responsible pet ownership bylaw clearly prohibits cats from roaming freely outside.

With spring approaching and thousands of migratory songbirds heading to our beautiful trees to rest or build nests, it’s crucial that Winnipeg cat owners act responsibly and within the law. If they don’t, I suggest city bylaw officers or the Winnipeg Humane Society take action against those who allow their pets to wander the neighbourhoods and feed on exhausted songbirds.

Chris Potrebka

Winnipeg

A landlord’s view

Re: Landlords, tenants and the cost of renovations (Think Tank, April 18)

Reading Brendan Devlin’s opinion piece on Saturday, it took me until the final column until I found a point where I could agree with the author. And that was the need for expanded public housing. Other than that, it was a socialist diatribe against landlords.

As a landlord, I’ve positively had it with this anti-landlord sentiment. Did Mr. Devlin know a tenant on EIA with a lease can move out after the first of the month, breaking the lease, and still not owe their rent? The same tenant can destroy their unit. The landlord has no ability to pursue them for damages which may exceed twentyfold the paltry 50 per cent of one month’s rent damage deposit.

These aren’t theoretical questions. These are very real instances which have happened to myself on multiple occasions. No landlord in their right mind should ever consider renting to anyone without employment and a bank account.

This is where social housing needs to step in because the government system is using and abusing private landlords to cover the responsibility of housing individuals who use EIA.

As for the Residential Tenancies Branch? Tenants who decide they don’t want to pay rent know they’ll get half a year free before the landlord can get a hearing scheduled and an order of possession for their unit. Then the landlord is forced to hire officers to remove someone who hasn’t paid rent in six months. We landlords have almost zero rights over our own properties.

Mr. Devlin, I’d like to rent your car for a week, then keep it for five more weeks and not pay you. You could call the police on me after one day of not paying. Yet my house, the most expensive thing I own, is allowed to be held hostage for months by a tenant-friendly bureaucracy. It’s ludicrous.

If I don’t maintain my property, move out and find a property you like better. If my property is not maintained well, I’ll have to either fix it up or reduce the rent. But no one is forcing you to live there.

Sadly inflation is real. Everything costs more than it did. Groceries, gas, hydro, water, insurance, building materials. But landlords are not allowed to pass along these costs and are being restricted as to how much we can raise the rent by the government. Why? Because there’s more tenants (voters) than landlords and it plays better in the Free Press.

Don’t worry though. I’ve had enough of this fight against tenants and government. I’m selling my rentals to folks who will live in the properties themselves. The rental stock in the province goes down. Maybe you won’t be able to keep being a renter in the future because you’ve driven all the landlords away from investing in Manitoba. Be careful what you wish for.

Keith Gordon

Winnipeg