The following text may have been generated by Optical Character Recognition, with varying degrees of accuracy. Reader beware!

.Page 4, Tuesday, October 13, 1992 Is voting NO on referendum such a bad idea If you are a Good Canadian you'll be voting 'yes' on the National Referendum Oct. 26. This is the message some politicians are giving Canadians--if you vote NO you're saying no to Quebec and to Canada. I disagree. By saying no, I am not saying no to Quebec and a United Canada. I am just saying NO to this deal. First of all, I don't understand how this deal is going to benefit Canada. If I don't understand what makes this deal better, I'm sure I'm not the only one. Secondly, what I do understand of this deal is that Quebec gets more power. This power solidifies their demand that they be recognized as a Distinct Society. And what does this term Distinct Society mean anyway? Quebecers are different from the Ontarians, but in the same respect, Ontarians are different from Albertans, Manitobans, and Nova Scotians. If Quebec wants to be called a Distinct Society each province deserves their own recognition. As well, Natives should also be recognized as a Distinct Society, more so than the Quebecers. What happens after Oct. 26? None of the politicians have given Canadians any indication of what's in store for us then. All we know is if we yes say to the deal, Quebec separatism would become reality. I disagree. Canada--a Canada which includes Quebec--has survived 125 years officially as a country. Together we have survived two World Wars, the Great Depression, the Quiet Revolution along with several other crises in our 125 year history. We have seen triumphs such as the repatriation of the Canadian Constitution. If we give in to Quebec's demands, where will we end up? The more they get, the more they will want. I am not criticizing Quebecers, I am just stating a fact of human nature-the more you have, the more you want. And each time we hesitate or refuse to give into even the silliest of their whims will they threaten separation? Do we really want to spend the next 125 years bartering for Canad's survival? Can Canadians afford to give into Quebec's demands over and over again without receiving anything in retum? Can we afford to go through this process, over and over and over? By voting NO Canadians are putting an end to that cycle before it ever begins: By voting NO Canadians are not saying no to Canada. We are not being unpatriotic. We are just saying we are not ready to be held for ransom by Quebec. Cindy Laundry =Our Opinion ee : The united way ? Im all for it / As long ag my'yes"vote isnt a vote of confidence in ™)ulron ey SSeS Be oe = eth) MW ell MM a --. - The Nipigon-Red Rock Gazette and the Terrace Bay-Schreiber News are members of Laurentian Newspapers Limited 158 Elgin Street, Sudbury, Ontario P7E 3N5 (705) 673-5667 John Thompson, Vice President CNA NY PP 18 Ainad AG 25 Members of the Canadian Community Newspapers Association and the Ontario Comminity Newspapers Asscoiation EDITORS ADVERTISING PRODUCTION Cindy Laundry Ad. Manager & Quality Control Darren MacDonald Linda Harbinson Supervisor OFFICE / ADMIN. Ad. Consultant Heather Michon & Circulation Chery! Kostecki Clara Dupuis PUBLISHER...A. Sandy Harbinson Local offices are located at 145 Railway Street, Nipigon, Ontario POT 2J0 (807) 887-3583 fax 887-3720 and Highway 17 & Mill Road, Terrace Bay, Ontario POT 2W0 (807) 825-3747 fax 825-9233 2nd. class mailing permit 0867 One year subscriptions are available by contacting your local newspaper at one of the addresses listed above. Rates are:- Local seniors $12 Other local $18 Outside 40 mile radius $29 USA $38. GST must be added to all subscription purchases. More savings if workers stayed home from office This morning I left my house in the country at 6:30 so that I could catch a bus that drove due east for two hours and ultimately dumped me in the bowels of the Big City where I made my way to my office, my desk and my telephone. As soon as I got to my telephone I called Harry. Harry and I had a 10 o'clock meeting, but Harry wasn't in yet. His secretary figured he was probably caught in traffic somewhere between his office (just down the - hall from mine) and his home which is in a small town about as far east of the city as mine is west. I hung up and pondered the absurdity of the situation. Here were two worker drones, Harry and Yours Truly, dutifully plodding towards the big smoke from oppo- site directions at the crack of dawn through traffic jams, exhaust fumes and various vignettes of vehicular mayhem....just so we could sit down across a desk and talk business. To quote an old wartime slogan: Was This Trip Really Necessary? | Why didn't we both stay home in our pyjamas and do our business long distance? Well, because Harry and I are commuters, that's why. We belong to that loony benighted stratum of citizens who earn their paycheques in the city but lay their heads in the boonies. There are dozens of good reasons for commut- ing to work--cheaper accommodation, clean air, the sight of actual wildlife other than cockroach- es and sewer rats--but commuting comes with a hefty price tag: twice a day you have to gird up your seat belt, check your vital fluids' (gas, oil, windshield washer). Take a death grip on the Steering wheel and make the trip. But do we have to? Every day that I drive into the city I see literally hundreds upon hun- dreds of cars doing the same thing mine is-chugging down the road to and from the city in pathetic chrome-to-chrome daisy chains that Stretch over the horizon in both directions. And for what? Oh sure, some commuters have jobs that absolutely require them to bring Arthur Black themselves physically into the city each day, but some of us--in fact, probably most of us--are making the tiresome, smelly, dangerous and expensive trip to town to do something that we _ could just as well accomplish at home. ire Let's face it: most of us salaried stiffs don't eam our daily bread by being hewers of wood or drawers of water any more. Most of us these days--be we inventory clerks or managing edi- tors--are pushers of paper r wranglers of electrons. Our secret weapons are the : telephone, the personal =computer and the fax machine. And phones, PCs and faxes work just as well out behind the barn as they do in a skyscraper at Bay and King. What would happen if all the commuters who «=; could do their job from x? home, didn't go to the office tomorrow? The sav- ings would be astronomi- cal. In Britain, a report called STRATEGIC WORKSTYLES 2000 has just been published. It claims that if British commuters worked from their homes Britain would save more than $5 billion in fuel costs and have 9,000 fewer road accidents to contend with. It's starting to happen over here. Last month, the president of the Treasury Board announced a pilot project that will allow employees of the federal government the option of working from their homes, linked to their offices by tele- phones and computers. "It can improve many aspects of life for Canadians" said Treasury Board president Gilles Loiselle. "It can be good for family life, reduce environmental damage and encourage energy conservation." He may be right. Unfortunately, I can't think about it any more. Too tired. I have to get to bed so I can get up early tomorrow and leave the house at 6°20 ta catch 9a Aine that unl] Aniva