PAGE 4, WEDNESDAY. APRIL 23,1986, WI-ITBY FREE PRESS Sw hitbyPbihdeeWdedy BILL MCOUAT F- [x(Nh.M.N. Puhlishing Communily EdIlar F*zr*v* 6-13114>CEM-i lVALERIE C0WEN W ~J~' 11111 ~ ~ IIIThe Free Press iIuiI<ing, Advertlslng Manager 1:11 Brock Street North, Second Class Mail Volce of the County Town Michael ian Burgess, Publisher - Managing Editor 11.. lox20, Whityn. Regsration No. 5351 The only Whitby newspaper independently owned anîd operated by Wliith y residents for Wlitby residents. It's time, for a fuil account mg In Interviews lest week, Mayor Bob Attersiey, and Councliiors Marcel Brunelie and Tom Edwar- ds ail stated that the tîme has corne to clear the decldedly talnted air t hat has arisen as a resuit of the Iroquois Park controversy. The Whitby Free Press agrees. The controversy began because certain mem- bers of counciliaiiuded to Information contalned ln a series of confîdential documents. Those allusions caused (rlghtly or wrongiy> members of the press and the general public to infer that there was more to the Iroquois affair than meets the eye. Upon pursulng the matter iast week wlth a vlew to dispeillng the controversy once and for all, the Free Press wound up wlth a front page story that only serves to stir the controversy further. Trylng to flnd out exactiy why Town of Whitby spent In excess of two years and thousands of Letters to the editor r- EDITOR'S NOTE: Although the Incident dlscussed la the followlng letter to the editor occurred Ia Port Perry, we felt It would he of Interest la our readers because It ln. volved the Durham Regarnil Police. The newupaper coverage of the eveat referred to Ia the letter appeared ln the Port Perry Star. To The Editor: Last Saturday a couple of members of our Durham Police For- ce staged a scene on our main street more ap- propriate to Miami Vice than Port Perry. As a resident of this area sin- ce 1966 this scares me. I refer to the scuffie reported in which two young people were charged with "assault while trying to ascape custody". I know two of the people involved in this incident - indeed one of the people in- volved is known very weil by most of our residents - one of the young girls who has served you in the Pet Shop. Now this la pot some habituai criminal. I have looked for criminal records in both of the young men charged and find that only "1criminal" records are an old conviction for impaired drivlng for one, and nothing except traffic tickets for the other. This was a housewarmlng party for the girls new (and first) apartment. Attended by four or five close friends and her parents, her boyfriend and his close friends and has parents. No complaint of noise or disturbance was received by the police. As the report in the paper states "the police got lnvolved because of drinking In a place other than residence". Now: I am a non- drinker and appreciate efforts la keep drunks off the roads but in this case the group leaving the party at 12:30 a.m. had sober people that could drive the cars (in- deed no charges of that nature were laid). One of the people - only one - was carrying an empty mug- a souvenler of Nova Scotia (this was a housewarming remem- ber) and that's it. The officers thoroughly searched the car and no liquor of any kind was found. The reason there was a "scuffle" can be laid dlrectly to the way the officers approached these people (none of whorn are criminals remember). It worries me to thinlc that 1 may be leaving a party or be stopped by the police for any reason -and if an of- ficer says "lets see your ID -and if I ask him what have 1 done? - What's the problem? 1 1 will immediately be grabbed, have my jacket puJled down over my armns and be hurled on my back against the trunk of the car. In al fairness to the policemen involved probably the young man was insolent - he had been drinking- and his tone of voice may have been wrong - (aithough ail eight witnesses 1 have interviewed dlaim there was no cal for the police behaviour)- even 50, - I should hope that I wouldn't be treated like that just for repeatedly asking "what's the charge"y. The article in the paper says "none of the officers were injured", I hope not. They would have had to trip over one another to get hurt as flot one punch was thrown at them. The scuffle occurred as the young people, loudly ob- jecting were put in head locks, arrn locks, and vanious other restraints. I don't know how much dollars on a proposai that went nowhere Is a bit iike puiling hen's teeth. It's hard work and ln the end you have nothlng to show for your efforts. In severai Instances last week, people belng Inter- vîewed by the Free Press had to abandon the ln- terviewer's ulne of questlonîng because there are s0 many confldentiai*reports they could no longer remember what is confidentiai and what isn't and declded it safer not to answer the question at ail. At one point ln an Interview, Councillor Edwards pronounced that counci's confldentility was "ilmitlng my abllity to answer reasonable and legitimate questions from the public." Weil said. If WhItby councl Iis not here to serve the Interests 0f the people of Whltby, what exactly have they been eiected to do. If their sole purpose as eiected officiais Is to mystify their constituents and pass the buck on controversiai decisions 80 force is reasonable but they broke the hand of one of the people while hurling him into the cruiser and both people charged had to be treated at Port Penny Hospital for injuries sustained. The father of one of the boys approached an officer saying "hold it, let me calm him down, don't hurt hlm" and was straight armed off and told to "'get off" in gut- ter language. Now I realize this had developed into a poten. tially explosive situation and the of- ficers didn't want anyone interfering, but this ls not a bunch of skid row derelicts or criminals. These are people, like the rest of us in this town we ex- pect our police to be firm, but tactful and polite, not brutal and arrogant. From the eye witness accounts and my personal knowledge of the character of two of thse young people in- volved I can only con- clude that thse behaviour displayed by the police on this occasion is more appropriate to thse "Brown shirts of 1939" than our own blue shirts in Port Perry. J.D. Owen Taxed To The Editor: A smail business has to pay anything thse On- tario government wishes to assess them. Thse government needs no proof, only their opinion. You are guilty and have to pay im- mediately. Then you can object or appeal. Which means nothing as thse government has thse resources and just wear you down, until you give up. 1 have talked to other businessmen and they say you can't get fair treatment or win. They just consider it the cost of doing business and pay it. 1 have been told by government - officiaIs that 1 can't win. It will cost more to defend that it looks as If they share none 0f.the respon- sIbility for same they are dolng an excellent job. In the words 0f Mr. Edwards - and, lnterestIngiy, Gerry Emm- the final responsibiiity for the Iroquois Park decision, and any other decislons made by council, rests wlth the counciliors them- selves. The town's staff and consultants are oniy there to, foilow councll's directions and If their performance Is not up to scratch It Is councii's job to address the probiem promptiy and efficîently. To wait more than two years and then, when ail Is said and done, mutter under your breath that you weren't gettlng satisfactory Information sImpiy isn't good enough. This tack Is not oniy a negation 0f councll's primary function, It Is aiso a cheap way to make it look Ilke the whoie thing was somebody else's fault. yourself than you can possihly win. Tise present methods thse Ontario government are using are contrary to tise laws of Canada and are discriminating against amaîl businesses. Tise Ontario government la ingnoring the Canada Charter of Rights. At tise present time thse Ontario Fuel Tax, tise Ontario Retail Sales Tax and the Workers' Compensation Board are isarassîng my business. a) 1 have letters from the government that state in their opinion I am guilty. b) 1 have had monies taken fromn my bank account without my permission. c) I have tried to ap- peal to the Supreme Court of Ontario and 1 have a letter from the Ministry of Revenue stating they want the appeal dismissed and the Ministry will pay the costs. (If they think I arn guilty why are they offering to pay costs to have it dismissed?) d) It appears it la im- possible to gel a day in court to obtain justice. 1 have aIl tise proof and documentation regarding these con- ditions and welcome an opportunity to b>e heard. This letter is being sent to business .SEE PG. 6