This week’s Letters to the Editor

Grandparent questions DDSB bullying policy

I thought the Durham District School Board had a tough policy on bullying.

My daughter and her family moved to Uxbridge a year ago from Port Perry. My grandson, who was in Grade 1, was attacked by two boys his first week at Joseph Gould (Public School). One bully took his brand new prescription glasses off his face, broke them in half and stepped on them. Not much done.

This year, on the first day of school, the same two bullies pushed my grandson to the ground and one kicked him in the head. Again, not much done. He gets picked on weekly, often witnessed by yard duty staff. Again, nothing done.

How can a child learn when he is in fear of getting bullied constantly. The school policy is just words on paper as no action is taken. Shame on the staff at Joseph Gould PS.

David Mount, Uxbridge

*****************************

New Cosmos puzzle section a hit

I would like to say it was great to have the puzzle section in your Uxbridge paper! It’s nice to have while reading and looking over all the articles/ads/info, plus keeps the mind active! Hope to see lots more!

Mike Slaughter, Uxbridge

*****************************

Why no women run for office

At the recent mayoral debate, moderator Ted Barris noticed there were no women running for the top jobs of mayor and regional councillor: “Where are the women? Come on, ladies.”

While perhaps tossed out as an off-the-cuff observation about the all-male candidates running on stage, treating the absence of women as a punchline or a casual shrug misses the mark. More importantly, it places the onus back on women to simply “show up,” while ignoring the toxic reality that drives them away from local office.

Women are not absent from municipal politics due to apathy or a lack of civic dedication. In our community and across the country, women are already leaders in this regard. The drop-off happens specifically at the ballot box - and the primary deterrent is safety. When hostility strikes municipal officials, it hits them at home.

As repeated investigations have shown, female candidates face disproportionate, gendered vitriol, violent online threats, and intimidation that frequently extends to their doorsteps and families. For women - particularly in close-knit communities - deciding not to run is not indifference. It is a rational, protective calculation for themselves and their loved ones.

When community leaders and moderators ask “Where are the women?” in a lighthearted, chiding tone, it trivializes a serious democratic crisis.

If we genuinely want women at the debate table, we must stop treating their absence as an amusing curiosity and start taking accountability for the civic climate we foster.

Until we take real, measurable steps to protect people in public life from harassment, online mobs, and intimidation, qualified female leaders will continue to make the sensible choice to serve their communities anywhere other than town hall.

Kristy Kernohan, Uxbridge

*****************************

‘Wrong’ about paper straws

I read with interest Roger Varley’s column about the seemingly odd practice at Corrections Canada of handing out paper straws so prisoners won’t injure their noses when snorting drugs (“Am I wrong?, Oct. 1).

The initial reaction of most readers, I suspect, will be shake their heads at the lunacy of this story and come away feeling that the people at Correction’s Canada have no common sense. Then, we will pass the story around, with embellishments, reinforcing the notion that government is full of incompetent, ‘woke’ people, with crazy ideas.

A few readers, who are more curious than accusatory, may look into the matter further to see if there is a context in which the straws policy might seem more rational?

Those who do will learn that between 5,000 and 7,000 people are taken into federal prisons each year and more than 60 per cent of them have substance abuse problems at the time of their admission.

Despite a zero tolerance policy on the trafficking of drugs in prison and stringent security measures, including detection dogs, ion scanners, body scanners, physical search, random urine analysis, and surveillance, contraband still gets in.

Corrections Canada, like Health Canada, treats individual drug abuse as a health issue. Diseases related to substance abuse, such as HIV and Hepatitis C, spread rapidly in the confined spaces and when they do, we would not expect Corrections Canada to deny inmates medical care.

Keeping all illicit substances out of the prisons would be the ideal solution, but is it possible given the extreme profitability of drugs in prison, the advancement in drone technology and justifiable restrictions on draconian security measures?

So, harm reduction, clinical treatment, education and support services to help inmates recover from substance abuse are offered, not as a convenience to drug users, but as health measures to reduce the spread of disease. Paper straws are one of these interventions.

Although we may not agree with the paper straw policy, even with this small amount of context, we may be less likely to dismiss it as a whacky way of coddling people who don’t deserve to be coddled.

David Richardson, Uxbridge

*****************************

A caution on downtown building

Home is where the heart is. I support this place of family and friends - a community built on generations of shared history, mutual respect, and deep roots. But my experience living, volunteering in and watching our town evolve tells me something is deeply out of balance. Change is coming fast, and it’s leaving residents asking a hard question: Whose interests are really being served?

To understand why downtown development feels so tense, we have to look at the physical realities of our core. High-density downtown property developments will sit immediately above crucial underground servicing, utility networks, and the culvert. When heavy builds and shifting footprints crowd these areas, the margin for error is razor-thin.

After years of complex downtown engineering and infrastructure challenges, our community is watching public parking spaces shrink, accessibility for seniors and families get squeezed, and everyday infrastructure pushed to the limit.

This is what it feels like to be managed rather than heard.

When major municipal bylaws, property agreements, and downtown land sales are advanced through formal administrative channels - signed off by corporate leadership like Clerk and Director of Legislative Services Debbie Leroux and driven by CAO Kristi Honey - residents find themselves navigating a maze of bureaucratic hurdles. Public input is treated like a procedural check box rather than a genuine dialogue, leaving the public to fight for basic transparency on public files.

Let's be clear: we are not cattle to be moved, managed, or processed.

Compare this to the legacy of long-serving community builders whose decades of leadership anchored an era of a genuinely open-door council where residents were welcomed into the conversation, not managed from a distance.

If we want to protect Uxbridge's character, our historic landmarks, and our core infrastructure, we can't afford to sit on the sidelines. It’s time for residents to stand up, demand transparent public records without administrative runaround, and remind local leadership that our town isn't just a corporate balance sheet - it’s our home.

Bev Northeast, Goodwood