Strong com­mended for stance on high­way

The Compass - - OPINION -

Dear edi­tor,

I would like to com­mend Lynn Strong for bring­ing for­ward this mat­ter of great pub­lic con­cern (Half-ar­sed high­way, Sept. 21st edi­tion of The Com­pass).

I agree 100 per cent with ALL of Lynn’s com­ments and con­cerns. I am, how­ever, very dis­mayed by some of Trans­porta­tion Min­is­ter Tom Hed­der­son’s com­ments.

Mr. Hed­der­son ac­knowl­edges “there have been com­plaints about the road over the years,” but said it meets stan­dards es­tab­lished by the Trans­porta­tion As­so­ci­a­tion of Canada, and is one of the new­est high­ways in the prov­ince, hav­ing been com­pleted less than a decade ago.”

It may meet the CUR­RENT MIN­I­MUM stan­dard — or the stan­dard at the time of it’s con­struc­tion — but ‘stan­dards’ evolve, and they evolve to im­prove what­ever it is that is be­ing mea­sured.

So, what is the magic num­ber of ac­ci­dents and/or deaths it will take to change what­ever the ‘STAN­DARD’ is that he refers?

The fact that the North River in­ter­sec­tion was an “af­ter­thought” that was “ never in­tended to be there,” does not ad­dress the fact that what IS THERE is dan­ger­ous for sev­eral rea­sons, least of which is that its ex­is­tence cre­ates the op­por­tu­nity for dan­ger­ous il­le­gal u-turns.

What about the bro­ken lines on the road where they should never be? Were they an af­ter­thought, too?

The quote that takes the cake for me, how­ever, is this one: Many driv­ers make il­le­gal uturns at the in­ter­sec­tion, but Hed­der­son said, “pru­dent driv­ers don’t break the law.”

No, Mr. Hed­der­son, pru­dent driv­ers don’t break the law. BUT, pru­dent driv­ers are killed by driv­ers that do. And if the high­way was de­signed bet­ter there would be less op­por­tu­nity for less pru­dent driv­ers to make dan­ger­ous er­rors that cost lives. Char­lene Dawe-Roach

Co­ley’s Point

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Canada

© PressReader. All rights reserved.