WIITBY FREE PRESS, WEDNESDAY. J ULY 24. 1985, PAGE 5 "I have sworn upon the altar of God eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man." - Thomas Jefferson TUIL0 WIE É/?HTBABLE TO -e ) R 0 Rl e R CROW'S NEST by Michael Knell Have you ever stopped for a moment - even a fleeting moment - to contem- plate more than the small piece of earth that you happen to inhabit on this planet? Most of us obviously don't. Most of us can't or won't. Those that do so, from time to time, get severe headaches and begin to suffer depression and frustration. Most of us are more concerned about next month's mortgage payment and whether we'll have a job next week than we are about the future of the human race. Sorry, folks but you've caught me in one of my contemplative moods. As a newsman, I often wonder or not if my profession really does any good. Politicians, academics and other often speak about "The Power of the Press" but I'm not sure that power exists. The pages of our national daily newspapers and the broadcasts of our television networks give us much to ponder on every day. But if we actually took the time to think about the information, issues and events being com- municated to us we would probably drive ourselves insane. For example, how can any rational, compassionate, decent human being look at the news reports from East Africa and not become angry? In Ethiopia and The Sudan, hundreds of thousands of people are dying of starvation in a world where affluent North Americans and West Europeans throw away more food than is needed to keep these people alive? Why is it necessary for a large group of popular entertainers to perform a 16-hour concert to raise a scant $90 million to buy food for these people? If we in the west were true to the Judeo-Christian ethics we proclaim, there would be no need to raise millions of dollars to buy food and medical supplies to aid these people. If we were a society with a conscious our governments, on our behalf, would be taking prompt and immediate action in conjunction with our neighbours and allies to do something. It could be successfully (and truthfully) argued that because the media brought this situation to our attention, these massive relief efforts were under- taken. But it is also obvious to me, anyways, that we didn't bring the facts of this tragedy in focus clearly enough for because while many are organizing to meet the current problem, the question of how to prevent further tragedy is left unanswered. The media has also failed (or we aren't listening - sometimes I'm not sure which is correct) to make us understand the true implication of the arms race. If instead of admiring Ronald Reagan's rhetoric we listened to it, I wonder how many of us would be willing to allow him to continue to play John Wayne to Gor- bachov's bad guy. Conversely, if we truly understood the historical significance of the Soviet Union's expansionist policy in places such as Afganistan and Poland would we continue to sit idly by. Closer to home, for a moment. If we truly understood the politics and the issues facing this country would Canadians maintain their admittedly deserved reputation for complacency? If Canadians understood that complete and ab- solute free trade with the Americans would sign this nation's death warrant, would we continue to allow Brian Mellowrunney to spout it off as a major policy alternative? Before we enter into free trade with the U.S. let's take a look at their corporate and financial history. Many American corporations (including many who stand to benefit from a complete free trade pact with Canada) don t respect national integrity or loyality. If they did why did so many of them con- tinue to sell fuel, munitions and technology to Nazi Germany while Great Britain and the rest of the Commonwealth were fighting for its very existence? As a journalist, I'm often frustrated. Far too often, the members of the Four- th Estate are used as scapegoats. Our professionalism, our integrity, our patriotism and our basic goodness as human beings is far too often called into question. Those*who are subject to our scrutiny often denouce us as scan- delmongers and sensationalists. But when we bring important issues to the fore, very rarely do we make an impact. l'Il give you two examples from right here in Whitby. A few months ago, Joe Bugelli had a great idea. He wanted developers to guarantee the quality and workmanship of their new homes in a similar manner to guarantees placed on new cars by Ford or General Motors. This newspaper supported it. We believed then, and now, that this measure would be a major (and needed) innovation. But the action finally taken by Whitby Town Council last week added up to maintaining the status quo in most regards. So, the impact we had was minimal. It was minimal because we didn't move people to speak out on this issue. Another issue that failed to make any impact on people in Whitby was the biomedical waste transfer station proposai by Decom Medical Waste Transpor- tation Systems Inc. Disregarding the application itself, what was tragic was that we didn't examine the basic issue of biomedical waste disposal itself. Coun. Joe Drumm said throughout the debate that Whitby shouldn't be the conscious of Metro Toronto or southern Ontario. He's right about that. But we have to be our own conscious. We have to ask hard and tough questions of our- selves. How are we dealing with this waste? How are we disposing of it? Are we taking all the appropriate measures? Those are the questions that we should have been dealing with. I don't really care that the Decom plan was given the boot, but I do care about how we're dealing with biomedical waste in Whitby. But we didn't think about that. We got so hyped up in emotional arguement that we took leave of our senses. So, the next time you read a newspaper and watch a television newscast, con- sider what you have read or seen. You just might get angry enough to do something. J! IGBLUIC)MNE WITH OUR FEET UP By Bill Swan Now that the Queen's Park beach ball has passed into other hands, you can expect the bizarre. A case in point: Sam Cureatz, late of the Miller cabinet, cries the blues (and other colors) over a plan announced recently by Ontario Hydro to buy into the construction of a nuclear generating plant in Manitoba. Well, fair enough, and Sam has been quoted as saying that if Ontario has to pay $5 billion for power, that money should be spent in Ontario, to create jobs, etc. etc. etc. This, of course, while the Peterson Liberal gover- nment contemplates closing down the now infamous Darlington nuclear generating station. That is in Sam's riding, you should know, and Sam may suffer politically if Darlington goes down the pipes. Which may at this point lead readers to wonder what all this has to do with a column in the Whitby Free Press, which is definitely, thank heavens, not in Durham East. (Some of Whitby is in Durham West, and some is confused.) The answer? Darlington to the east and Pickering Nuclear Generating station to the west are roughly equidistant from the Oshawa-Whitby border. In case of nuclear attack, the enemy might want to destroy both stations. How? One bomb over eastern Whitby might do. Anyway, here you have a former Tory cabinet minister crying 'Unfair, foul,' about a decision made by Ontario Hydro, and trying to dump it on the doorstep of Peterson's Liberals. But the Tories at Queen's Park originally set up Ontario Hydro as an empire onto itself. It should be no secret that both the Liberals and the New Democrats have been crying in their beer about this for years. Ontario Hydro ignores the Legislature, the Ontario Energy Board, consumers, and some of the facts of life. Ontario Energy Board: a provincial creation to act as watchdog over the energy of the province. Fair? Well, a needed role in government today. As such the board can dictate -- not suggest but dictate - to the natural gas industry But to Ontario Hydro the board may only suggest. And Ontario Hydro can. and usually does, ignore those suggestions. It should not come as a surprise to anyone, then, if over the next few months Ontario Hydro acts out its independence in ways designed to embarrass the Liberals in office.'Hence the announcement about spending $5 billion to help Manitoba build a nuclear generating station. To meet energy self-sufficiency needs, you see. The logic goes like this: coal-fired generators cause acid rain. Bad, bad acid rain. Bad, bad coal. Nuclear generating stations cost a lot to operate. Bad, bad, costs. Nuclear stations also draw crowds of protestors worried about glowing in the dark. Bad, bad protestors. Bad, bad nuclear power. So if coal and nuclear both cause dirt and grim and waste matter that just won't quit, then doesn't it make sense to pay Manitoba to generate the power? Ontario gets the power, Manitoba gets the dirty waste and protestors. And the money and jobs, says Sam Cureatz, stressing that Ontario should be self-sufficient in electrical power. Over the past ten years, Ontario Hydro has moth- balled production capacity of more than 7,700 megawatts at 14 direct plants built or planned at a cost of more than $2.5 billion. So if Ontario Hydro now has to reach out of the province for its needs ten years down the line, it ain't exactly David Peter- son's fault. Defending Darlington because it creates jobs is akin to defending Jack the Ripper because he kept women off the streets. The Liberals -- prodded by the New Democrats who have this horror of anything nuclear - are quite correct in taking a look at the whole project. It may be too late to halt Darlington now. But from the beginning the plant has resembled too much of a political pork barrel. An election coming? Jobs are the issue -- speed up Darlington. Anti-nuclear forces putting on too much heat? Slow down Darlington. Given the number of projects Ontario Hydro has mothballed this past decade, the need for Darlington has not been proven. Given the fact that it was begun without environmental assessment, the project should be examined. Some 5.000 people are employed on the construc- tion of Darlington. Certainly this is enough to have sufficient impact on the local economy. But on com- pletion at least $10 billion dollars will have been poured into a huge hole in the ground. The interest alone on that money should be enough to create 30,000 jobs paying $30,000 -- forever.