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

\ + Editorial Comments "Liquor Changes? We trust the provincial government will move very cautiously and slowly to re-vamp the liquor laws in Ontario. Last week, a government advisory committee handed down some 70 recommendations to change the laws governing the sale and con- sumption of booze in Ontario ft is no secret that those current laws are in many instances an- tiquated and should be changed to reflect the 1980's instead of the Victorian Era, but some of the recommendations made by the com- mittee are puzzling at'best and if adopted as law may only add to the general problems of alcohol abuse in society. Opening up liquor sales in movie theatres, for example, is not an especially enlightened suggestion. Surely movie and theatre patrons can sit through a two hour film or stage show without having a drink.' And just about anyone who's been to a movie lately know it's hard enough to hear the dialogue over the rustle of popcorn boxes and candy wrappers, never mind patrons juggling a glass of beer. It's well known that the sale of beer at baseball and football games has created certain problems with rowdiness and intoxication. Those same kinds of problems could beset the movie and theatre going audience. And speaking -of baseball and football games, one of the sug- gestions from the committee is to allow wine and liquor sales. Come on, a lot of the people who drink at the games can't even handle weak beer. Why give them liquor and wine on top of it? There are an in- creasing number of sports fans who feel the beer in the ball park ex- periment has failed and it should be scrapped or greatly re-varmped. The committee suggests that licenced establishments be allow- + ed to stay open to 2:00 a m.. instead of the present 1:00 a.m. This apparently is because tavern owners in border areas want to com- pete with those spots across the line (Quebec or the States) where the bars are open to 3:00 a.m. There may be a good case to be made for keeping Ontario's watering holes open later, but just to allow bars in border areas to compete is not one of them. Likewise the recommendation that patrons be allowed to bring their own bottle into a restaurant while they dine. What's the rationale behind this suggestion? In the first place it is an affront to the owners of licenced dining and eating establishments. The sale and consump- tion of booze must be tightly controlled by the, owners of licenced establishments. ~~ What's a restaurant owner to do if a patron becomes obviously intoxicated and still has half a bottle on the table? Can he take that bottle away' and face a charge of theft? ' ~~ Will the law apply to unlicenced restaurants whose owners don't want booze in their establishments? Will patrons be allowed to walk out with their half empty bottle in a doggie-bag? The potential for abuse and major problems in allowing -- to "brown bag' their own booze in restaurants is enormous. It's a dumb idea. : When the committee recommendations were made public last week, many of them came under the immediate attack from the PRIDE group (People to Reduce Impaired Driving Everywhere). And rightly so. A lot of the recommendations, if passed, will lead to greater - access to booze away from the home. And that in turn will lead to more people getting in their cars with more liquor under the belts. Is this the direction Ontario wants to be going? How about a crackdown on special occasion permits where just about anyone can plunk down a few bucks and get a permit to sell booze at just about any social or private function with virtually no con- trols or enforcement? (Turn to page 6) if this 15 STAR WARS, /m all for /t / " \ rt NHL sTARS US2R. STARS ~ f Port Perry STAR 235 QUEEN STREET - PORT PERRY ONTARIO" Ft 'Phone 985-7383 FO Box 90 LOB INO J. PETER HVIDSTEN Meter of the Publisher radar Comm - 2 Community Newspaper Assoc.a Advertising Manager Pubins Luesiay tre ifs shed every Tuesday Dy e v Star Co td Port Perry QO nity Newspaper Associa! J.B. McCLELLAND Editor A thir ed as ecard « iads mad by t* «eo Department Ottawa and for cash CATHY OLLIFFE News & Features yment! of tage nn (as cond Class Ma Registration Number 0265 Sulvscrphion Rate In Canada $15 00 per yea Elsewhere $45 00 per year Single Copy 35 COPYRIGHT AR vou! ang Cer de ty ' advertisements produced Dy he adver tung department of the Port Peery Sua Cormmgany Lmaded are protected under copyr gh! . = a ~ kK] y and may ndt De reproduce w oy ® wm Mer perusal the publisher I ' i 'Chatterbox by Cathy Olliffe DOWN THE TUBE "Tonight's the night," said my husband, Doug, settling down on the chesterfield in front of the television. "What time is Gzowski on?" It was Thursday evening, and the Gzowski he was referring to was Gzowski and Co., the half hour CBC production featuring Peter Gzowski in- terv iewing a different Canadian each week. "Seven- -thirty," I replied. "Just a few more minutes.' Each and every Thursday for some time now, Doug and I have made a ritual of watching Gzowski and Co. It's one of our favourite shows on TV and the main reason I look forward to Thursdays. ~Peter Gzowski, a paunchy middle-aged jour- nalist with nicotine-stained fingers and glasses that never quite stay up on his nose, has the best interview style I've ever seen. While some interviewers seem to feature themselves in front of the camera almost as much © as their guests, Gzowski manages to focus the viewer's attention on the subject at hand. "He's visible, sure, but his ambling figure becomes part of the scenery, part of the backdrop. When he is noticeable, he is seen as a friend to the guest and to the audience, a welcome friend that shows' you parts of Canada and Canadians themselves that are rarely focused on anywhere else. Whether the subject is a famous singer or a nat-so-famous Nova Scotian fiddler, his interview- ing style imparts a warm earthiness to all who are featured on the show. Over the last few months, he has spoken to K D Lang, the off-the-wall country singer who ap- peared on the Juno's wearing a wedding dress and cowboy boots; Mike Duffy, the rotund little Parlia- ment Hill journalist, the best in his field, who can't get a job for any network other than the CBC because he doesn't look glamorous; the trio of friends who have become the leading voices behind the radio and TV ads, including many beer commercials; and Dan R. MacDonald, now deceased, who is famous nowhere else but in Cape Breton, and died as poor as a churchmouse. Dan R. (pronounced in Nova Scotia as one word, "Denurre") was the subject of last Thurs- day's Gzowski and Co. Fascinated, Doug and | watched as Gzowski toured us through the isolated hills of Cape Breton, talking to people who knew "Denurre'" and who still play some of the 2,000 fid- dle tunes he wrote in his lifetime. "Denurre'" was shaped like a pear. with glasses held together by an elastic band and no money for anything. not even sheet music. He wrote his songs on the backs of scrap paper, and . he died with nothing more valuable than a tattered . jacket, some 2 0 songs, and-a fiddle worth more 'than $3,000. Through old home movies, Gzowski showed us a man with great talent, hitherto unknown to the rest of the world. ~ Certainly. I had never heard of him before, but after watching Dian R. MacDonald on Gzowski and Co., I wished I could have known him. But that's the way Gzowski makes you feel about all his' guests. Rich or poor, famous or in- famous, he treats all his subjects with sensitivity laced with jovial good humour. After Thursday's show was over, Doug and I discussed the program at.some length, as we always do. and agreed it was the best doggone show on TV. as we also always do. So it came as quite a shock Friday morning, this morning, when I read in the Toronto Star that Gzowski and Co. wi be cancelled in the near future. As well as 327 jobs, and Fraggle Rock, the puppet children's series, Gzowski and Co. will be eliminated. The Journal will feature fewer documentaries. and the number of variety and arts specials will be cut by almost half. The reason" A slim 1.3 per cent budget in- crease in the coming year. Denis Harvey. vice-president of English language CBC television, called the program cuts "unfortunate Unfortunate' Isn't that just the understate- ment of the year" I feel outraged. It seems like every time you turn around the CBC is cancell- ing quality programming, shipping former staf- fers jobless into the streets, and destroying what has slowly become the most intelligent TV on the dial. -. And believe me. I'm not the only one who feels this way In the winter 1986/87 edition of Sources, -- a directory and magazine for journalists, reporter Barrie Zwicker wrote a thought-provoking feature titled "A goal for national surviv al: 50 per cent Canadian TV content by 1990. He pulled mo punches throughout the story, especially when he wrote, "I seriously believe that destruction of the CBC would be the greatest disaster to befall Canada in her history." Because most people 't read Sources, and will therefore have missed Zwicker's story, I've taken the liberty of reproducing a few of the facts about the CBC printed in his article. Take a read' through them ---- they opened my eyes and I'm sure they'll do the same for you: 1. The CBC custs nine cents per Canadian per day to run. Nime Ome-thirtieth of the cost of a pack of cigarettes 2 For the demneanimgly paltry (and declining) investment. whach amounts to ¢ontrolled fiscal starvation. the CBC provides more than 156.000 (Turn to page 6) fe