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

.Democratics, and it appears likely that Lt. Governor John 4 -- PORT PERRY STAR -- Tuesday, June 4, 1985 editoria 0) Ontario Politics On or about June 18, the Provincial Conservative government of Frank Miller will be subject of a vote of non-confidence in the Ontario Legislature. That vote will carry thanks to an agreement inked last week between the Liberals and the New Aird will turn the reins of power over to Liberal leader David Peterson. Aird could say no and force an election, but this does not appear likely. The Liberals and New Democrats have inked an alliance to ensure that if the Liberals form a government, there will be no vote of non-confidence for two years, thus there will be no election for that period of time. it's a precedent setting document, this pact between the Grits and the NDP, and one can't help but wonder what the ultimate price will be if it runs the full course. Needless to say, Mr. Miller and his Conservatives are none too pleased with what has taken place and what likely will take place in a couple of weeks. And who can blame the Tory leader. He will go into the history books as the Conservative leader at the helm when 42 years of Blue dynasty in Ontario toppled to the ground. Mr. Miller is seeking the advice of constitutional and legal experts to determine if the Lib-NDP Pact is anything less than a mere political agreement. Of course, the Tory leader has no choice but to go down kicking and screaming. He must share some of the blame for the May 2 election results, and let's face it, his own future as leader of the Party isin more than L ME NUNQUUN ~~ © Gth 7a (I f7ked) ° 3 5, ], --- FINISH 85 = « D> TERE 8 "ITS OVE y 0} O / ~D INA ACE AN ol (ARLLATTE ND) (DRX KRY STAR 25 077 =) a little jeopardy. a AL ono a his rms ws rss pT -------- a As the events unfold at Queen's Park over the next couple of weeks and the legal experts offer their opinions about what the Grits and NDP are up to, one thing must be kept firmly in mind. The people of Ontario did vote for a change last May 2. More than 60 per cent voted against the Tories. The Liberal-NDP coalition will have 73 seats in the Legislature, compared with 52 for the Tories. . Whether the Alliance is a holy one, or proper, is a political issue, not a legal or constitutional one. Frank Miller should accept the political realities of the situa- tion, take his Party into Opposition, and do his beefing in the Legislature. We suspect that the Libs and NDP will give him lots and lots to beef about over the next 24 months or so. As for the Liberal-NDP marriage, we can hardly wait to see the fur fly when one of the partners decides it's time for a divorce. Use It Or Lose It We recall all wo vividly in the summer of 1981 when that nasty Liberal Minister of Transport Jean-Luc Pepin announced that the VIA passenger service between Havelock and Toronto would be cut because it was los- ing too much money. Commuters along the route were up in arms; there were committees formed, public meetings in Peter- borough, and even a wild scheme whereby the passengers would buy rolling stock and run their own mini railroad. The Conseryalves picked up on the issue, and pro- mised that if they were elected to Parliament, the Havelock-Toronto service, along with several other passenger lines in the country, would be restored. They have come clean on that promise, for this week the Havelock-Toronto train is back on the rails to serve the public with stops in Myrtle, Burketon, Dagmar, Clare- mont, Pontypool and other places along the route. Fair enough. But the federal Conservatives are wav- ing a large yellow flag in front of the train and the message is loud and clear. They will not subsidize trains that are running half empty. If the public wants this rail service, the public had better use it. Passenger rail service makes sense in moving relatively large numbers of people from Point A to Point B in reasonable comfort. The costs are high, to be sure, but then anyone driving a car 100 miles each day to work - and then paying for parking, is also faced with high costs. The service is on the rails seven days per week and the system will be re-evaluated after a two year period. If it is found to be under-used it should be scrapped as a waste of money. In the meantime, it 1s up to the public. Use it or lose it. It is also up to VIA to make sure the public is con- stantly aware of the service. That was a major problem before the service was disbanded. A lot of people were simply not aware the service existed, as there was no advertising or promotion on the part of VIA. We're glad it's back, and we hope it stays around. chatterbox by John B. McClelland COMMON SENSE? I sometimes think that here in Canada, we are throwing common sense right out the window. of this might wéll be the fears express- ed recently by Childrens Aid Societies in Ontario that under the new Charter of Rights and Freedoms, anybody could be eligible to adopt a child. The Charter, rightly so, forbids discrimination on the grounds of age, handicap, religion or gender. The Childrens Aid Societies fear that if they reject an adoptive parent for one or all of these grounds, they could end up facing court action. Hypothetically, a 75 year old in a wheel-chair could not be rejected as an adoptive parent because of age, mental or physical condition. A single person may also have grounds to go to court, if rejected by an adoption agency for not being married. These hypothetical cases have not yet been tested in court, but the way things ae going in this country, it surely will be just a matter of time. What happened to common sense? Are adoption agencies going to be powerless to reject perspective parents on certain grounds? What's going to happen to Jewish and Catholic agencies who place children in their care with parents of the same faith? Maybe I'm just getting old-fashioned, but I believe that when it comes to the adoption of children, some 'discrimination' on certain grounds is a necessity. Common sense tells me it is. I wonder if it was the in- tent of the Carter to totally remove all 'discrimination' in adoption practices? There are also common sense questions being rais- ed about the Youthful Offenders Act. Under this Act, 18 year olds are treated as juveniles if they are taken to court for committing a crime. And children under the age of 12 simply cannot be charged for a crime. Surely, there are occasions when 18 year olds must be treated as adults when it comes to law enforcement and justice. Likewise, there are occasions when 12 year olds should be charged and tried when they commit a crime. It's a matter of common sense. But then, like so many things in this country, common sense seems to have been shoved to the back burner. We are in such a hurry to guarantee that every conceivable protection and guarantee is written in stone, every possible loop- hole is plugged, that I wonder if we haven't gone too fast, too far. On a less important plane, the people who run the National Hockey League seem to have swept common sense under the carpet as well. Can someone tell me why two teams were still fighting for the Stanley Cup on the next to last day of May? Had Edmonton not been the powerful club it is, the final Cup series could still be go- ing on this week in June. It's crazy to start a hockey season in September with 80 regular games and then add another six weeks of playoffs to determine the top team. A And one more thing. Why does it take more than three hours to play a single game? Some of the playoff matches dragged on and on and on. Sure, TV ads have to be thrown in every time the whistle blows, but three hours and twenty minutes is simply too long for any single athletic competition. The length of the season, plus the fact games dragg- ed on for more than three hours, sure takes a lot of the enjoyment out of it for me. Common sense might tell the powers that be, to re- vamp the playoff structure, and to somehow find a way to speed up the course of a game. A few years ago, fighting and brawling on the ice came close to killing the sport for a lot of people. That's been cleaned up a bit, and in my opinion, the calibre of play has been improved by a great measure with the emphasis on speed, passing and scoring. But even the most die-hard hockey fan has to admit that come June 1, the time to hang up the blades for another year is long overdue. Common sense. Two piain and simple words that seem to be overlooked in many ways these days. The recent budget from Ottawa may be another ex- ample. Common sense dictates that a government can't continue to roll up deficits year in and year out. Stopp- ing the spiral can be done two ways: raise taxes and/or reduce spending. The budget last week did that in a small way, and already the bleating and moaning has started. Another example of the way we function in this country. When somebody's ox is getting gored, common sense flies out the window. Of course, it's going to hurt a bit to reduce a $200 billion national deficit. That's com- mon sense, too. Probably the most curious example of how common sense gets shunted to one side these days concerns our environment. Any grade four school kid knows that pollution is killing this planet. Chemicals in the Great Lakes, acid rain in the air, dangerous junk that sits in barrels, the list goes on and on. We know there is a massive problem, we know for the most part, how to deal with it, and common sense should tell us all that we had better deal with it now, or it could be too late. For many species of birds and animal, not to mention lakes in Ontario, it is already too late. But we pay lip service, moan about the cost and put it off til tomorrow. Where's the common sense" Finally, the arms race. We need to be strong to be free. O.K., fair enough. But the number of nuclear weapons in the world today equals all the bombs of World War 2, many thousand times over. And the arsenal gets bigger by the day. Would common sense not suggest that we put a stop (Turn to page 6)