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

PAGE 4, WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 18,1982, WHITBY FREE PRESS wh«tb'y I Voice of the County Town Published every Wednesday by M.B.M. Publishing and Photography Inc. Phone 668-6111 Michaellan Burgess, Publisher -ManagIng Editor The only Whitby newspaper independently owned and operated by Whitby residents for Whitby residents. The Free Press Building, 131 Brock Street North, P.O. Box 206, Whitby, Ont. MICHAEL J. KNELL Community Editor ELIZABETH NOZDRYN Advertlslng Manager Second Class Mail Regstration No. 5351 Jhere is nothing wrong with Whitby holding its own referendum on nuclear disarmament Last week, Mayor Bob Attersley sald that Whit- by wili not hold its own referendum on nucléar disarmament during this November's municipal election. He pointed out that the question of nuclear weapons and nuclear war Is the responsibility of the Parilament of Canada and should be dealt with by Members of Parliament elected to the House of Commons. Furthermore, he suggested that if Whitby resi- dents are Interested in making his or her views known on this issue they should contact our MP, Scott Fenneil. Well, this Is fine as far as it goes. We agree entirely that as interested Canadian citizens we should all take our concerns on this Issue to the federal governrnent. However, it might be a good exercise in democracy for the I got a long letter from a convict recently, complaining about the laxness and luxury in our prison system - a letter i might have been prepared to take more seriously if the man in question hadn't been due for release in the next few days. He rade a number of claims to illustrate the points he was making - that in his institution, in- mates are allowed to have portable TV's ard stereos in their cells; that the meais are always substantial, sometimes elaborate; that drugs and alcohol are freely available; and that security is negligible. His thesis is that there is no punishment in prison life today. l'm not prepared to accept his claims without checking, although I've heard much the same thing from other inmates, and I'm not prepared to accept the fact that deprivation of liberty, alone, is not punishment. But what he had to say about security bears repeating perhaps, in the light of the recent riot and murders at Archambeault Prison near Mon- treal. The inmate writes that the gross lack of security at his institution (one in Ontario that I won't name) has led to a sharp increase in inmate violence. He cites two murders and countiess stabbings at his institution in the last 14 months. And he adds: "There is a huge arsenal of homemade weapons hidden all over this institution. These weapons, mostly knives and pipe billies, are made in the various shops where steel is in abundance. Inmates are never searched when leaving the work area. There are no portable steel-detecting body scanners. Hence any inmate can walk out of any shop carrying anything that can be concealed on his person." I would caution you again that this is simply the unsubstantiated claim of a lone inmate who's got nothing to lose by blowing the whistie because he's leaving. Perhaps he wants to create trouble for some of his more troublesome mates. I don't know. But the fact remains that three guards and two inmates were dead at Archambeault after a group of prisoners went on the rampage armed with homemade knives. And I think we as a society had better start ask- ing the politicians if the evidence bears out what the in- mate writes. If what he says is true, then we'd better start asking ourselves as a society if we've gone stark, star- ing nuts. No one is suggesting that we should go back to the dank and inhumane prison conditions of the 19th century or even the first half of this one. But one of the great dangers of reform - any reform - is a very strong tendency to fall off the other side of the horse. And l'm beginning to wonder if we haven't done it again. That's not news but.that too is reality. question to appear on this year's municipal ballot. There are several good reasons for this. Firstly, it does not matter where the protests are made, so long as they are made and that our leaders are aware of our feelings. We do not believe that it would be-inappropriate to tate that al1 Whitby residents, as Canadian citi- zens and inhabitants of this planet do have a vested Interest in the question of nuclear disarma- 'ment. We also believe that the late Prime Minister John Diefenbaker was right when he declared that no nuclear weapons shall ever be housed on Canadian sol and that this country would not build any despite the fact that we have the raw materials to outdo the superpowers in the arms race in this regard. It is also more than evident that the current federal administration ls apparently not overly in- terested in the question of nuclear disarmament just as it is apparently not interested in the state of our national defense. (If it was, our Armed For- ces would be substantially, better trained and equipped than they are now.) While not meaning to be an aiarmist, from where we sit it would appear as though the United States and the Soviet Union are again practising their brinksmanship - a craft they finely honed during the Cold War of the 1950's and 60's. After all, it was in more than bad taste that an underground nuclear test was conducted in the Nevada desert on the 37th anniversary of the Hiro- shima bombing. It is also difficuit to dismiss this test as coincidental. Those Whitby residents who fought in the last World War would probably be amongst-the first to say that such horror should never again be direct- ed against the human race. From personal exper- lence they know (as many of us can't and hopefully never will) the pain and suffering and stupidity of warfare. They fought and watched their comrades die to preserve a peace that all of us hope will last forever. So, while the mayor is correct in saying that nuclear disarmament is a national Issue which should be taken up by the House of Commons, it Is nonetheless an Issue that must strIke at every level of government and society. If the people of Whitby speak out against nuclear arms and join fellow Canadians living in other municipalities across the Province of On- tarlo maybe the federal government will not turn a deaf ear on us. We also believe that while it is Whitby Town Council's duty to oversee the smooth operation of the town and provide those services which are paid for by the property taxpayer, we also belleve that there are times and Issues when it is the responsibility of our local leaders to take local opinions to higher levels of government. Surely, it is within council's mandate to repre- sent our community as a whole just as It is Fen- nell's mandate to represent us In Parliament. Attersley's objection on the basis of jurisdic- tion ls a correct, if shallow, one. It is an Issue that affects the Individual Whitby resident as much as ôther national issues such as inflation, high in- -terest rates, unemployment and high taxation. Af- ter all, town council and Durham Regional Council have been known to pass and endorse motions on these issues in the past. Nuclear disarmament is not an intellectual issue. It is real. The threats made by our allies and foes are real. They do exist. The IndivIdual has a right to speak on these issues. If Fenneil was to bring up this issue before the House of Commons, a referendum supporting nuclear disarmament from Whitby would certainly lend support to his cause. This Is an.opportunity forWhitby to work with our MP, and the issue of jurisdictIon should not be seen as a barrier to asking the question.