Letters, Oct. 13

Find some middle ground

There’s an old house in Wolseley where magic happens. It’s where a future Rhodes Scholar grew up. It’s where a future First Nations doctor worked part-time as a teenager. And it’s where a master perfumer blends bewitching scents.

It’s called La Parfumerie. Blink and you’ll miss it. There’s no neon sign over the porch, draped with lush green vines. Its customers enter through a front garden decorated with carefully tended flowers.

But after 27 years at the same location, this little home business will soon be forced to shut down. Why? Because the city says it must either stop serving walk-in customers or make significant renovations to bring it into compliance with rules designed for bigger retailers.

La Parfumerie brings in less than $100,000 a year from mail-order sales and a smattering of walk-in customers. For years, city hall was fine with this. Bylaw inspectors had visited it and given it the green light to continue.

But it seems the rules have changed. Or perhaps enforcement has changed. La Parfumerie hasn’t. It can’t afford the cost of major renovations, and it can’t afford to lose the walk-ins. So, the doors must close.

It’s doubtful city council intends to be mean or obstructionist. After all, the rules are meant to preserve the integrity of residential neighbourhoods while ensuring retail stores are safe and accessible. Perfectly reasonable goals.

But for small creative artisanal businesses, like potters, artists and perfume blenders, the rules are financially impossible to implement.

Which brings us to our ask. Perhaps city council could try a little creativity. Perhaps write new rules that would offer a middle ground. A middle ground that recognizes that not all businesses are the same. And one that would allow a form of entrepreneurialism that is pure magic.

Rachel Morgan

Winnipeg

Giving thanks

Re: Khan’s abrupt departure presents desperate Tories with a valuable opportunity (Oct. 6)

Happy Thanksgiving, planet Earth. I’m a gay guy. Canada is at the head of the line on planet Earth when it comes to equality for queer people. We’ve got a lot to be thankful for in Canada.

One of the things that I am thankful for is Tom Brodbeck.

Tom began his Oct. 6 column with this: “If the Manitoba Progressive Conservatives are serious about getting out of the political wilderness, they should start by electing a progressive conservative leader. Not a louder conservative and not a more combative conservative — a genuinely progressive conservative.”

Right on, Tom.

John D. Perrin also had an excellent letter in the Oct. 7 Free Press. It was about former Manitoba premier Duff Roblin. John wrote that Roblin became leader in 1954 and was faced with the challenge of building the modern PC Party from the ground up. Roblin served as premier from 1958 to 1967 and implemented a progressive agenda. Roblin was a Red Tory, who governed to the centre-left, compared to a more conservative Liberal Party in those days.

In the Wikipedia entry about Roblin, former NDP premier Ed Schreyer says this: “Duff Roblin led a Conservative administration the likes we’ve not seen elsewhere in Canada and not likely to see again. It was positive in every respect. He brought Manitoba into the modern era, with desired changes in education, hospital finance, roads, social assistance and flood protection.”

Brodbeck suggests that former Tory MLA and cabinet minister Rochelle Squires would be worth considering as the next leader of the Progressive Conservative party in Manitoba. I agree with Tom wholeheartedly about this. I think that Rochelle Squires would be an excellent choice for this position.

Rich North

Winnipeg

Hydro planning imperfect

Re: “Better to embrace criticism” (Letters, Oct. 8)

The major assumption Manitoba Hydro undertakes is the weather. Hydro projected a $214 million profit for the 2025-26 fiscal year. On Sept. 29, it reported a $446 million loss. It took on additional debt due to $751 million in operating losses. In addition, Hydro stated the fiscal results for 2025-26 were “significantly influenced by circumstances largely beyond Hydro’s control.”

Bipole III was completed at a cost of $5 billion. Hydro announced last year that $7 billion in transmission repairs and upgrades is required. It is in debt to the tune of $26.5 billion. Last winter, 695 MwH was imported from the U.S.A. every hour for 30 consecutive days.

Critics of Hydro’s planning need to understand how to deliver reliable, affordable electricity and realize that far less dependence on the weather, transmission lines and importing from the U.S.A. is required.

Todd De Ryck

Winnipeg

Mirroring public sentiment

Re: The election of our discontent (Oct. 5)

Using dismal results from an Abacus Data poll commissioned by the Free Press, Matthew Frank paints a vivid picture of Winnipeg’s decay and neglect as perceived by those surveyed.

Fifty-three per cent of those surveyed feel Winnipeg’s maintenance of parks and open spaces is “fair” or “poor”; 88 per cent believe maintenance of streets and roads is “fair” or “poor”; 84 per cent perceive the operation of Winnipeg Transit as “fair” or “poor”.

Residents interviewed identified myriad issues requiring urgent attention, including crime prevention, public safety, homelessness, public use of illicit drugs and an unreliable, incoherently planned, yet “improved” public transit system, all against the backdrop of ever-increasing property taxes. Their testimonies illustrate a zeitgeist of angst and dissatisfaction with Winnipeg’s current state.

As a resident of the Exchange District, I can also attest to the neglect of neighbourhood streetscapes — massive weeds sprouting out of grills at the base of neglected, unpruned trees growing voluminous suckers that block the sidewalk; others with dead branches awaiting a strong wind; litter strewn about sidewalks and roadways. Such scenes are just metres away from city hall.

The “grumbling residents” have voiced their discontent at “crumbling crossroads” at an auspicious time as municipal elections approach.

Kenneth Meadwell

Winnipeg

What is ‘normal’?

Re: “Maybe ASI will need us” (Letters, Oct. 5)

I was shocked to read Earl Martin’s recent letter denouncing Jordan Laidlaw’s Sept. 19 opinion piece (“AI, animals and us”) about humanity’s relationship with other animals.

Martin insists that killing (euphemistically described as “harvesting”) non-human animals for food is “normal.” Normalcy should never be used as a justification for injustice. Just over a century ago, it was “normal” for women to be denied the right to vote. Racially segregated schools used to be “normal” in this country. The word has been widely used by those who advocate against gay rights and acceptance. As vegan sociologist Roger Yates has said, in a society that accepts oppressive practices as part of the status quo, normal is violent.

Martin opines that Laidlaw “is not entitled to recast the majority’s ordinary nourishment as cruelty so the rest of us will feel guilty for what is on our plate.” Yet Laidlaw was not deceiving us when he wrote about the violence that is routinely committed against non-human animals by the industries that use them. Caring people who haven’t been desensitized would be horrified if they visited a slaughterhouse or vivisection laboratory. Laidlaw is perfectly entitled to advocate against this violence.

From a vegan, animal-rights perspective, the problem is not only factory farming, but all animal use. It is unfair to treat conscious, feeling beings as property — as objects that exist for us — rather than as the individuals whom they are. Far from being a fringe diet, veganism is a philosophy and way of living that seeks to liberate our fellow animals while bringing about a fair and peaceful human society.

Carolyn Harris

Ottawa.