Letters to Editor – June 21st 2008

Letters to Editor

UNLESS otherwise noted, these letters are to be considered unedited. The opinions expressed in the letters and comments are those of the writers and not of The London Free Press.

‘Ban’ talk instills fear in drive-through workers
Tim Hortons’ senior vice-president Nick Javor voiced his disappointment that Tuesday evening’s planning meeting was cancelled saying he was looking forward to “sharing the correct science” on fast food drive-throughs. (Overflow crowd forces postponement of drive-through meeting, June 17.)

If he was sincere about his quest for “correct science” and truth, he would stop fear-mongering about a “ban” on drive-throughs. The gallery at city hall was packed with restaurant staff, many of whom came fearing they would lose their jobs if a “ban” was approved.

The fact is, what is being considered is a moratorium on the approval of any new facilities with a drive-through component. The planning committee and ultimately council will also be considering long-overdue staff recommendations that are consistent with the desire to make these establishments more hospitable with the communities in which they do their business. All of these recommendations are more than reasonable — many other municipalities have similar regulations.

Further, restricting the growth of drive-throughs is an obvious and eminently sensible planning approach when thinking about ways to reduce our society’s carbon footprint, our dependency on oil and our addiction to the automobile.

The purposeful manipulation of what is at stake here is a disservice to the entire community and erodes the ability of council to obtain meaningful input on an important issue.

Finally, on the subject of the “correct science” coming from the industry, all of the advertising and spin in the world cannot obscure the fact that building more drive-throughs is wasteful, polluting and (for the vast majority of people) unnecessary. There is a well-documented history of PR-spin given to anti-environmental activities; it’s called greenwash. The suggestions that line-ups of idling cars are environmentally benign and socially necessary are simply preposterous.

POSTED BY: Jennifer Gilbert, London
POSTED ON: June 21, 2008

EDITORS NOTE: As published in The London Free Press on June 21, 2008

Drive-through t-shirts
How disturbing this morning to see some corporation make their minimum-wage employees wear a biased opinion on their chests! Independent of how we might feel about the proposed drive-through ban, don’t you think it’s pretty disgusting that these kids are forced to promote their employer’s point of view? Let us have our own opinions! Stay human!

POSTED BY: Eric Chorostecki, London
POSTED ON: June 21, 2008

Drive thru ban
There are other communities that have been able to convince the large national retail chains to develop and do business in a way that fits the location into the motif of the street.

St Jacob’s, Ontario and West Vancouver, BC have successfully told the big boys (and girls) “if you are going to do business here, you are going to build according to the decor and other stipulations put down by the municipality.

If the larger retailers want to do business here —and they do because they want to make money — they can be asked to comply with local rules. We do not have to prostitute ourselves and our community by claiming the sky is falling every time a major retailer wants it their way and tries to throw its weight around.

POSTED BY: Chuck Dungey, London
POSTED ON: June 21, 2008


Leave a comment

No comments yet.

Comments RSS TrackBack Identifier URI

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s