WIIITBY FI E PRESS, WEDNFSDAY. OCTOB3R 23.1985 PAGE 5 "I have sworn upon the altar of God eternal hostility againsi every form of tyranny over the mind of man." - Thomas Jefferson w THE CROW'S NEST by Michael Knell As most of you know, I'm a big downtown booster. Downtown Whitby is a great place that's just going to get better. The Downtown Improvement Area Board of Management has really come alive over the last couple of years and is finally exhibiting dynamic, intelligent and forward looking leadership. Needless to say, I was taken aback by a statement released last week by Lyn- da Buffett. She opens this statement saying that she has been a downtown mer- chant for seven years and for five of them she served as a member of the B.l.A "I have seen the development of ideas and hopes of the merchants brought forward to council on a number of occassions.' Buffett writes, "The board has come a long way but as yet has still not reached their potential mainly because of a stumbling block. The main stumbling block is the shortsightedness of our present mayor." She goes on to claim that her concerns are shared by others including old and new residents of the town as well as downtown merchants. Buffett is critical of the town and its relation to the events in the downtown core. She has accused the town of making but a "token effort" to revitalize the downtown area. Well, that sounds funny coming from a lady whose interest in the affairs of the downtown board was so negligible that she attended only three out of 13 meetings between January 1984 and February 1985. What really makes it interesting is that when the board accepted her resignation because she has failed to fulfill her obligations under the bylaw governing the downtown board. These regulations state that if any member fails to attend two consecutive meetings of the board without a specific ex- planation shall be deemed to have resigned. In other words, the rules are so written that people who don't take an interest in the affairs of the board will get the boot. And, guess what, that's exactly what happened to Lynda Buffett I would like to share with you, dear reader and fellow citizen. some of the con- tents of a letter written to Lynda Buffett by Ed Buffett (absolutely no relation . either personal or professional), president of the downtown board of management. "During 1984 and thus far in 1985," Ed wrote in a letter dated Feb. 22, 1985, "you have attended three out of thirteen meetings. In addition, during this period of time you have made no contribution to the board whatsoever in terms of involving yourself in this board's activities. "At no time during the period in question have you had the courtesy to contact anyone associated with this board to inform them of your inability to attend our regularly scheduled monthly meetings..." Ed continues. "In addition, although I have met you in your place of business on a number of occassions, you have yet to evidence any interest in the activities of the Down town Board of Management or to volunteer your services in one fashion or another." I find it quite amazing that Lynda Buffett would criticize Bob Attersley for taking a shortsighted view of the downtown board activities and the town for giving but a "token effort" when she herself doesn't appear to have taken an in terest in the board's activities. She wants to heap scorn, ridicule and criticism on Attersley and the town il self but she doesn't have any credibility to of fer when it comes to demonstrating her committment to the downtown core and its future. I read her press release and then I read Ed's letter to her. Then, I became very offended. Lynda Buffett has the unmitigated gall to severely criticize the mayor and the town for their efforts in developing, preserving and enhancing the downtown core while she made no real contribution herseif while a member of a publically appointed body whose mandate is to aid in the development of the downtown core. She says the mayor is shortsighted, but she hasn't offered any leadership and her record offers us nothing. lI'm a big believer in downtown Whitby. The current B I.A. has done more and is doing more for the downtown core than has been done in the last decade Progress is being made, not as fast and not as much as we would ail like. but it is being made. This progress is being made by the downtown merchants themselves They are taking charge of their own destiny. It seems Lynda Buffett doesn't see the town or council or the mayor as providing the needed leadership to make the downtown core vital once more. While the town has a legitimate role to play. is this really what the town should be doing? Surely those who have business and other interests downtown are the best suited and qualified to lead the downtown on the road to renewal. While I'm not going to publically endorse Attersley for re-election I have to agree with Attersley's decision to allow the downtown merchants to run their own show. Jim Gartshore took basically the same attitude when he was mayor. Both these men realized that the merchants have to lead themselves - the town can't do it. I also think that the town (and council) has been reasonably supportive of the downtown board and its plans. I've yet to hear any member of council (in- cluding Attersley) say anything critical of the board. In fact. they're ail quite pleased with the board and the leadership it is providing So where does that leave Lynda Buffett' I don't know that's up l) the voters to decide. Hopefully, they'll take a close look ai her record before making that decision. The future of the town as a whole and the future of the downtown core is far too important to be left to anyone who claims to have exercised leadership only to find out later that not only was there not any leadership, but there wasn't even any committment WITH OUR FEET UP By Bill Swan The story goes that the editorial writer o> a memorable but unnamed newspaper was departing for a well-earned vacation. (Writing opinions for newspapers is such demanding work. Before he left, he warned the beginner who was to fill in during the absence: -Don't touch anything closer to home than Afghanistan." The point being, in print, what many politicians have long known. Any outlandish opinion is possible, as long as the event has no direct effect on readers (or voters). The anecdote (guaranteed apocryphal has given rise in this business of newswriting as Afghanistanism. That is, write what you want. so long as it doesn't count. Politicians, as a lot, have more difficulty with the practice. Place' the wrong word in certain places and voila! the phone will ring off the hook. Or wring off the hook, if you don't mind the pun. To combat this difficulty. it is not unknown for politicians to sow seeds of confusion: get voters wrought up about issues that are clearly in other jurisdictions. It helps take the heat off Some examples: the issues in local politics. when you get down to the table pounding, are too nasty to deal with, or under provincial 'or federal> control and beyond redemption. Thus, you see local politicians talking about 1) capital punishment. Provincial politicians drag this one in often too. One of the current contestants for the Progressive Conservative party leadership has thrown this one in the pit. Since it's a federal issue anyway, he's safe on never having to do anything about it. But it sure gets a lot of juices flowing. That could be because many local issues - tax assessments. school courses, planning, industrial development, municipal finance - are too complex to get taxpayers fired up over But capital punishment - now theres a sure rocket Note, of course, that Captain Brian Mulroney got himself installed first as leader of the federal progressive conservatives and then elected as prime minister on the promise to hold an open vote on capital punishment in the House. Or let the voters decide. When last seen he was rowing fiercely due west of that promise. -2) abortion. Usually, this issue can be mentioned only by politicians not in a position to do anything about it. In the past year we have seen a provincial and federal election fought, yet this topic was men- tioned only by accident in either. It is a no-win issue. Whatever is said on either side will inflame the other. Compromise -- the essence of Canadian if not all politics -- goes out the window. Yet those bodies which can do something locally about the abortion issues, namely local hospital boards. can be filled by acclamation because it seldom dons on either side in the dispute to go beyond the issues and become active in the com- munity. 3) nuclear debates. In municipal politics this keeps raising its head. Yet little can be done at the local level with any meaning. But for most politicians it can be -- usually for beginners trying to establish a profile -- a media grabber. Along the same line, but further from home, comes an issue that has dominated the foreign news of late: the American revenge on the Achille Lauro hijackers. And the American hijackers of the hijackers themselves. The current opinion in North America, if one is to believe the views eminating from newsrooms, is that the Americans were just and true in doing what they did. High noon, and all that. And that the Egyptian president Hosni Mubarak was dead wrong when he apparently lied about whereabouts of the hijackers before their plane left Cairo. He should, say the vigilantes, have handed the brutes bver to the Americans right away. They did, after all kill an American tourist. (Or is alleged to have done so. Had the crime happened on Canadian soil I would have to be most circumspect in mentioning it for fear of being in contempt of court.) However. killing an American tourist is a bad thing to do. But it does grab the North American middle class where it lives (or would like to): right on the luxury tour of Europe. Love Boat, here we come. Killing anyone is a bad thing to do. I would never condone it. SLE PAGE l