Add new comment

I received the following email from a constituent following the May 21 RDOS board meeting:

Dear Michael,
I attended your Board Meeting this afternoon and was very pleased at the result, but sorry that the resolution did not include all areas of the RDOS.  

I was disappointed that you did not come aboard and take a "precautionary approach"which is the obvious solution at this point in time.  Your lack of concern for your constituents was somewhat alarming and needs to be urgently addressed.  You have been invited to a number of presentations by Dr Mac Patterson  in the Okanagan and have not bothered to even attend one.  You displayed a flippant, arrogant approach simply quoting Canada's Safety code 6 and Health Canada's website as the ultimate authority which you seemed either nervous or disinterested to challenge.  Your comments on myths were ridiculous and totally off the mark . If you had done some real research into the issue like Tom Siddon then you would realize that Canada's standards are  laughable compared with Sweden, Austria, Russia, China and India.  Do some digging into the real health risks involved then you will step up to the plate and protect your constituents and your own family.  

Do you want to go down tobacco road all over again and wait for the body bags in the streets before you awake from your "trust government in everything" slumber?

Quite frankly I was shocked that a University Professor was so simplistic when compared to an ex-electrician who has a good measure of common sense when querying why smart meters are not CSA certified.  Then another director admitted being very shy of deep understanding of the issues but again showed street smarts by asking why Lloyds will not cover any EMF issues anymore after years of risk analysis.  

You were elected to represent your constituents and take a stand 
for their health and wellness, not hide behind some vague, fatuous platitudes.  This smacks of moral negligence which if not arrested could develop into criminal negligence as people in your area decline in health and inevitably proceed to court action.

Remember who you pays your salary!

 

I drafted a few replies; some were snootier than others.  The one I actually sent is, in my view, only medium-snooty:

I assume you have read http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/ahc-asc/media/ftr-ati/_2014/2014-023fs-eng.php

During the discussion I merely read from this--a page on a website of the Government of Canada--and yet I am "ridiculously off the mark"?

If you truly believe what you have written [above] then you have a bigger problem than smart meters.  You have a massive federal department and a supporting edifice of institutional science that is incompetent, corrupt, or both.  I have cc'ed your MP on this because your remarks are best directed at those assigned decision rights on this topic by the laws of the land.

I have no interest in a religious war on this.  It is well above my pay grade.

 

The last statement is meant literally.  I believe this is a religious war in the sense that both sides believe they have THE TRUTH and regard any opposition as heresy.  And like any religious war, there is no satisfactory way to resolve the question.  The critical point is that I do not have to take part in this religious war since, as noted above, it is not my job (as RDOS director).  There are many other things that are my job as RDOS director to which I can more fruitfully devote my energies.  In short, I am very weary of this topic.

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions. Registered users of this site do not have to do this.