Thumbs up to letter writer

Editor:rnThumbs Up to Mary Hopkins for calling a spade a spade.
The editor and Jim Gouk, MP, in his letter above hers on the same page desperately try to confuse readers into believing that the Liberal Party is guilty of all wrongs showing up in the Gomery inquiry.
It is no doubt known to both that it was former PM Jean Chretien, who in March of 2002 called in the RCMP, before Auditor-General Sheila Fraser had reported the scandal, even before his successor, Mr. Paul Martin, called for the public Gomery inquiry.
Gouk says in the second to last sentence of his letter: Quebecors must be given a better choice than a separatist organization (his current partner The Bloc!) or a criminal organization (why not say which Jim?). He then wishfully ends his tirade by saying: We will give them that choice.
Jim is of course fully aware that his Conservative gang with people like Grewall is in danger of losing their current second position in the national polls to the NDP.
It was the Hon. Prime Minister Paul Martin who on his first day in office cancelled the sponsorship program.
Within minutes of the tabling of the Auditor General's report on the sponsorship program it was Mr. Martin who established the Gomery Inquiry.
It was Mr. Martin who called in the RCMP, and meanwhile charges have been laid against seven individuals.
It was the Hon. Leader of the Opposition, Stephen Harper, who suggested in April that he had no problem asking Canadians to deliver a verdict on the Gomery inquiry evidence before the Judge does so himself! This sort of behaviour has now backfired on himself and his Conservative (loose) Alliance.
Let's wait for the final report by Judge Gomery, and meanwhile please stick to Governing our Canada, which you all were elected to do.
Art MolenkamprnOsoyoos

Editor:rnWe are rural area of Osoyoos that the town wants to annex.
We have observed with great interest the town's difficulty with Rattlesnake Canyon. From what we understand Rattlesnake applied for and received permits for their amusement park from the town of Osoyoos.
For whatever reason, the town decided to spend $100,000 on legal fees to fight what they had already approved.
Now, for the unsightly retaining wall on Jasmine, built without permits, encroaching on town land, and the possible liability to the town. The town sees fit to use a fair solution that would appease the neighbours and would not make it too inconvenient to the property owner!rnAnd the Town of Osoyoos wants us to become part of the town – we think not.
Richard and Millie Stenner

Editor:rnIn June 8th paper I read with disgust that there are still 10 outflow pipes in town that go out to the lake. The Osoyoos Lake Water Quality Society had written a letter to the town in regards to these pipes in 2001 but nothing changed!rnIn the same paper I read that the town plans to spend another $10,000 (previous 22,850) for the appeal in the Rattlesnake Canyon case.
I wondered if it would be wiser to invest money into protection of the lake which is the major tourist attraction of this town, rather than trying to hold back a successful business operation!rnWhat would the town be if this lake became a slough. We better start to wake up because that could happen real soon and maybe the town wouldn't have to worry how to hinder successful businesses thriving during the tourist season!rnKatharina RiedenerrnOsoyoos

Editor:rnAttending the public hearing on June 9th, I was disappointed with the handling of the meeting, with all due respect to our Mayor.
The meeting started 30 minutes late due to a delay in getting enough written information on the project. Also the speakers from the public were not given a time limit, and some of the speakers droned on like a filibuster. Also the mike was facing the councillors, and I doubt if the audience could hear from the rear of the auditorium.
The presentation from the developers was very sophisticated and well supported with diagrams and graphics.
If the reaction from the audience was any indication of the feeling of the populace, this project is doomed to failure. The 12 storey height of the building seemed to be the major concern.
I was the last speaker on the list and though my speech was somewhat satirical, with tongue in cheek, I meant what I said.
1 – I approve the development with provisos, all adding to the cost to the Developers.
2 – Our beach on the lake frontage from the bridge to the Lions Park should be renewed with new clean white sand imported by the millions of tonnes at the cost of the developer.
3 – The Bylaws which our town cannot enforce, regarding transients and their dogs polluting our park and lakeside due to inadequate patrol, will be enforced by assessing the Developers the necessary costs for this enforcement.
4 – Assess the Developers a major cost to provide sewers around our lake.
5 – Provide a reflective system on the High Rise to prevent shadowing from this massive skyscraper.
Of course, none of these conditions will be met by the Developers, hence the development should fail.
The main concern by our populace should be our poor tortured lake. Another huge development will add more strain on the poor old lake to survive where there is no end in sight to save it.
E.R. (Rod) KerrrnOsoyoos

Editor:rnMy wife and I had the opportunity to attend the public hearing, Thursday evening, pertaining to the rezoning of the old Packing House site. The purpose of the hearing was to receive public input on the proposed resort development for that property.
While it has little, if any, bearing on my comments in this letter, I am in favour of the development for a number of reasons.
While the process prescribed by law for rezoning and other bylaw changes is by no means perfect, it is the one that we have to work with. I believe it was expected by the designers of the law that the process would be conducted with some manner of decorum and respect for the opposing views.
During the hearing I heard boos, catcalls and derisive laughter heaped on anyone that didn't conform to the right way of thinking.
Many thousands of Canadian Men and Women died for us, to preserve our freedom and our democratic process. It is sad to see that process denigrated by a vocal minority that believe that being rude, that their voices will be given greater import over those that believe in respecting opposing viewpoints.
Rather than showing public disrespect for the process, I would suggest that you use the ballot box to achieve your point of view.
Derek NoskernOsoyoos

Editor:rnIt was with great interest that I read your article (June 8, 2005 “ Page 31) focussing on the WestJet UP! magazine.
I experienced the same pleasure/surprise whilst flying over Osoyoos on my way to Toronto in early April. Reaching in the pocket of the seat ahead of me, I found the article; DESERT WINE, OLIVER B.C. IS THE MOST IMPRESSIVE WINE TOWN YOU'VE NEVER HEARD OF in UP! magazine.
WOW!rnI lived in Osoyoos for 20 years; I am delighted to see the hard work of visionary winemakers coming to fruit and being exposed in such a positive manner on a national scale.
It is significant to notice here that the article in UP! is featuring an exhibit of 11 terrific photographs taken by Paul Eby, Osoyoos/Oliver photographer and owner of Fast Photo.
Paul Eby has captured the essence of the good looks of Osoyoos/Oliver distinctive setting, particularly in the shot Horses/vineyards that portrays native horses running in the arid desert toward Vincor's lush green vines.
Commendable Paul.
The timing of the UP! article couldn't have been any better following the recent movie Sideways shot in California.
Jean Roux,rnWhite Rockrn